To put children ahead of millionaires and billionaires by restoring the pre-2001 top income tax rate for people earning over $1 million, and use this revenue to invest in LIHEAP; IDEA; Head Start; Child Care; nutrition; school construction and deficit reduction.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2009

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will resume consideration of S. Con. Res. 70, which the clerk
will report by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 70) setting forth the
congressional budget for the United States Government for
fiscal year 2009 and including the appropriate budgetary
levels for fiscal years 2008 and 2010 through 2013.

Pending:

Baucus amendment No. 4160, to provide tax relief to middle-
class families and small businesses, property tax relief to
homeowners, relief to those whose homes were damaged or
destroyed by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and tax relief to
America's troops and veterans.
Graham amendment No. 4170, to protect families, family
farms, and small businesses by extending the income tax rate
structure, raising the death tax exemption to $5,000,000 and
reducing the maximum death tax rate to no more than 35
percent; to keep education

[[Page S2037]]

affordable by extending the college tuition deduction; and to
protect senior citizens from higher taxes on their retirement
income, maintain U.S. financial market competitiveness, and
promote economic growth by extending the lower tax rates on
dividends and capital gains.
Bingaman amendment No. 4173, to provide additional funding
resources in fiscal year 2009 for investments in innovation
and education in order to improve the competitiveness of the
United States.
Gregg (for Specter/Craig) amendment No. 4189, to repeal
section 13203 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1993 by restoring the Alternative Minimum Tax rates that had
been in effect prior thereto.
Conrad amendment No. 4190, to add a deficit-neutral reserve
fund for repealing the 1993 rate increase for the alternative
minimum tax for individuals.
Kyl amendment No. 4191, to protect small businesses, family
ranches, and farms from the Death Tax by providing a $5
million exemption, a low rate for smaller estates and a
maximum rate no higher than 35%.
Conrad (for Salazar) modified amendment No. 4196, to reform
the estate tax to avoid subjecting thousands of families,
family businesses, and family farms and ranches to the estate
tax.
Bunning amendment No. 4192, to repeal the tax increase on
Social Security benefits imposed by the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993.
Conrad amendment No. 4204, to add a deficit-neutral reserve
fund for repealing the 1993 increase in the income tax on
Social Security benefits.
Gregg (for Specter) amendment No. 4203, to increase funding
for the National Institutes of Health and the Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Program.
Dorgan amendment No. 4198, to increase the Indian Health
Service by $1,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2009.
Alexander amendment No. 4207, to establish a deficit-
neutral reserve fund to improve energy efficiency and
production.
Kennedy amendment No. 4151, to add a deficit-neutral
reserve fund for increasing federal student loan limits to
protect students against disruptions in the private credit
markets.
Sununu amendment No. 4221, to save lives, promote overall
health care efficiency, and lower the cost for the delivery
of health care services by facilitating the deployment and
use of electronic prescribing technologies by physicians.
Murray (for Lincoln) amendment No. 4194, to provide the
Veterans Benefits Administration with additional resources to
more effectively meet their increasing workload and to better
address the unacceptably large claims backlog.
Alexander amendment No. 4222, to take $670,000 used by the
EEOC in bringing actions against employers that require their
employees to speak English, and instead use the money to
teach English to adults through the Department of Education's
English Literacy/Civics Education State Grant program.
Sessions amendment No. 4231, to establish a deficit-neutral
reserve fund for border security, immigration enforcement,
and criminal alien removal programs.
Cornyn amendment No. 4242, to protect the family budget by
providing for a budget point of order against legislation
that increases income taxes on taxpayers, including hard-
working middle-income families, entrepreneurs, and college
students.
Conrad (for Pryor) amendment No. 4181, to add a deficit-
neutral reserve fund for Science Parks.
Allard amendment No. 4246, to raise taxes by an
unprecedented $1.4 trillion for the purpose of fully funding
111 new or expanded Federal spending programs.
Menendez amendment No. 4259, to establish a reserve fund
for immigration reform and enforcement.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we are on the budget resolution. We will
complete work today or tomorrow at some point. It is important we
complete the business.
Let me indicate this is the circumstance we inherit: The last
balanced budget was in 2001. Since then, this administration has run up
record deficits and record debt.
Mr. President, 2004 was the largest dollar deficit in history. In
fact, we have now had the five largest deficits in our history under
this administration. That dug a very deep hole as we began to write
this budget resolution.
This is what has happened to the debt: At the end of the first year
of the administration--we do not hold them responsible for the first
year because they inherited a budget from the previous administration--
the debt of the United States stood at $5.8 trillion. It will be, at
the end of 2009, over $10.4 trillion. This administration will nearly
have doubled the debt of our country.
In terms of who is financing that debt, increasingly we are dependent
on the kindness of strangers because increasingly this money is being
borrowed from abroad.
I show this chart: There are 42 Presidents pictured here. It took 224
years to run up $1 trillion of U.S. debt held abroad. This President
has more than doubled that amount in 7 years. In fact, he has far more
than doubled foreign holdings of U.S. debt in 7 years.
That brings us to this budget, which recognizes the economic weakness
our country is confronting. So our first priority is to strengthen the
economy and create jobs. We do that by investing in energy, to reduce
our dependence on foreign oil. We invest in education, knowing we
cannot be a first-class nation unless our people are the best educated,
best trained in the world. We invest in our infrastructure, to help
make us more competitive. We also expand health care coverage for our
children because that is a wise investment that pays off over a
lifetime. And we provide tax cuts for the middle class.
At the same time, we restore fiscal responsibility by balancing the
budget in 4 years, and maintaining balance in the fifth year. We also
seek to make America safer by supporting the troops by providing for
veterans' health care, and by protecting the homeland by rejecting the
President's proposed cuts in law enforcement, the COPS Program, and our
first responders.
We all know the economic weakness the country is currently
experiencing. Economic growth, in 2006, averaged 2.6 percent; in 2007,
2.5 percent. The Congressional Budget Office is now estimating for 2008
the economic growth will only be 1.6 percent. Many of us believe the
economy is not growing at all at the present time. In fact, we may well
be in a recession.
So in order to strengthen the economy, we have provided for stimulus
in this budget resolution: some $35 billion in an insurance policy,
standby authority in case this economy weakens further; providing
relief in the hard-hit housing sector, where we know they are not in a
recession, they are in a depression; also having the option of
extending unemployment insurance; providing for additional resources
for food stamps; and also having the opportunity for additional funding
for low-income heating assistance, the WIC program, and infrastructure
funding for 2008--projects that are ready to go: road building, highway
construction, bridge construction, school construction--projects that
are designed, that are engineered, all of the land has been acquired;
they just need the money to begin construction and to hire people and
to create jobs.
There is also substantial tax relief in this budget resolution:
alternative minimum tax relief, so an additional 20 million families
are not caught up in the alternative minimum tax; additional energy tax
incentives, again to reduce our dependence on foreign oil; additional
education tax cuts, in order to make college more affordable; the
stimulus provisions we have discussed, especially targeted at the
housing sector; and, of course, the all-important extenders--those tax
provisions that are expiring that need to be extended.
The first amendment to the budget resolution will also extend the
middle-class tax relief. It will extend the marriage penalty relief,
the child tax credit, the 10-percent bracket. It will also provide for
estate tax reform, providing for an exemption of $3.5 million a
person--and all of that to keep pace with inflation as well. It also
contains an important new property tax relief measure that the chairman
of the Finance Committee will describe, tax relief for our troops and
veterans, and tax relief for the victims of Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita.
All of that is against the backdrop of a budget that is balanced.
Once the Baucus amendment is adopted that extends the middle-class tax
relief, we show that we are able to balance the budget in the fourth
year, and maintain balance in the fifth year, showing a positive
balance in the fourth year of $4 billion, and a similar amount in 2013.
We are also, under this resolution, once the Baucus amendment is
adopted, taking the debt as a share of our national income down each
and every year, from 69.6 percent, down to 66 percent in 2013. So we
have the debt going in the right direction, going down as a share of
our national economy.
We also have spending going down under this budget resolution as a
share of our national income, from 20.8 percent of gross domestic
product in 2009, stepped down each year, until in the

[[Page S2038]]

fourth and fifth years we have reduced Federal spending as a share of
our national economy to 19.1 percent.
Now, we will hear on the other side assertions that this budget
spends hundreds of billions of dollars more. I don't know what budget
they are talking about because it is not this budget. This shows the
difference between our budget and the President's budget in terms of
spending. The red line is the President's spending line. The green line
is the spending under this resolution. My colleagues can see, in
relative terms, they are very close. There is only a 2-percent
difference in spending over the 5 years, the difference between what is
in the President's budget and what is in this budget. We use those
additional resources for energy, for education, for infrastructure, for
our veterans, and to maintain law enforcement programs such as the COPS
Program.

One percent: What does this signify? One percent is the difference in
the spending level for this next year between our budget and the
President's budget. There is 1 percent more spending in our budget in
total for 2009 than is in the President's budget. Again, those
additional resources are devoted to primarily education, reducing our
energy dependence, infrastructure, and veterans health care. Those are
the primary areas of difference.
Here are the lines which show the difference between the revenue in
our proposal and the revenue in the President's proposal. We will hear
there is a $1 trillion tax increase somehow buried in this budget.
There is no such thing. They made the same claims last year. There was
no $1 trillion tax increase last year; there is no $1 trillion tax
increase this year. I said yesterday that if I brought up the menu from
the dining room downstairs and introduced it as a budget resolution,
our colleagues would say there is a $1 trillion tax increase because
that is what they always say.
The fact is the difference in revenue between the two is 2.6 percent.
Here is the difference between the revenue in the President's budget
and the revenue in our budget: 2.6 percent. That means we are able to
pay the debt down more. That means we are able to balance the budget.
That means we are able to put some additional resources in these high
priority needs such as veterans health care, education, energy, and
infrastructure to help create jobs and stimulate this economy and also
position America to be fully competitive in the years ahead.
So how could we get 2.6 percent more revenue than the President and
not have a tax increase? Well, I suggest we can do it by going after
things such as the tax gap, the difference between what is owed and
what is paid. The vast majority of us pay what we owe; some don't. That
amount of money has become very large. The IRS says in 2001, that gap
between what is owed and what is paid was $345 billion.
However, that is not the only place there is money that is not being
secured. We have offshore tax havens. The Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations has told us we are losing $100 billion a year to these
offshore tax havens. Here is an example: A building in the Cayman
Islands, a 5-story building that claims to be home to 12,748 companies.
They all say they are doing business out of this little building. Does
anybody believe that? The only business they are doing down there is
monkey business. What they are doing is avoiding and evading their
taxes in this United States. We ought to shut it down. If we do shut it
down, there is a tremendous amount of money there, according to our
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
This article appeared on March 6 in the Boston Globe: ``Top Iraq
contractor skirts U.S. taxes offshore.'' It is a perfect example of
what I have been talking about. This story indicates that:

Kellogg Brown & Root, the nation's top Iraq war contractor
and until last year a subsidiary of Halliburton Corp., has
avoided paying hundreds of millions of dollars in federal
Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring workers through
shell companies based in this tropical tax haven.

I wish that was the exception. Unfortunately, our Permanent
Subcommittee on Investigations says it is no exception. It is
increasingly the case.
Let me close by saying on the other side, our colleagues will say a
$1 trillion tax increase. They made the same claim last year. Now we
can go back and check the record and see what actually happened. With
Democrats in control of the House and the Senate, did they increase
taxes by $1 trillion? What actually happened? Well, if you go check the
record--this isn't a forecast, this isn't a projection, this isn't a
claim; this is a fact--this Congress reduced taxes by $194 billion.
They increased revenue through loophole closers by $7 billion, so a net
reduction in taxes of $187 billion. That is what the Congress did.
Congress, controlled by the Democrats in the House and the Senate,
didn't increase taxes, as was claimed by the other side last year. They
make the same claim this year. The fact is we cut taxes, and we cut
taxes quite dramatically.
The stimulus package that will lead to checks being sent out to 100
million Americans, that was a tax cut. In addition, fixing the
alternative minimum tax so more than 20 million American families
weren't hit with increased taxes are in those numbers.
This is a budget resolution worthy of our colleagues' support, and I
encourage each of our colleagues to carefully evaluate it and to
support it.
Might I, before my colleague begins, thank him for his many
courtesies during consideration of the budget resolution. As always, we
have differences. My colleagues will hear them now, I am sure. On
substantive issues, we have places where we disagree, but he has been
an absolute professional in the conduct of the work of this committee
and the handling of this resolution on the floor. I thank him for it.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Hampshire is
recognized.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, let me join in complimenting the chairman
of the committee. He is also a professional and a very enjoyable person
to work with. Whether it is his birthday or he is sick, he does a great
job around here. I think the comity which we have and the
professionalism that is shown, between our staffs especially, who do an
extraordinary job, under tremendous pressure, is the way the Senate
should work. Obviously, we are debating and engaging on very
significant issues of public policy, but they should stay as political
and substantive policy debates. The actual operation of the Senate and
the management of a piece of legislation such as this needs to be done
through cooperation between the two sides, and as a result of the tenor
the chairman sets in the committee, it is.
However, as he said, I do disagree. I do disagree with the bill that
has been brought forward. In my opinion, it is a lost opportunity of
immense proportions.
This Nation faces so many very significant issues--the most
significant, of course, being the threat of Islamic terrorism and an
attack on our shore again. But that is followed fairly closely by the
equally significant issue, in my opinion, of the looming fiscal
meltdown of this Nation as a result of the costs which we have put on
our children, costs which they will have to bear dealing with paying
for the benefits of the retirement of the baby boom generation.
In addition, there are issues such as tax policy and issues such as
health care this country needs to deal with. Everybody who fills up
their gas tank with gasoline any day of the week knows we better get
our hands around the cost of energy or we are going to be in big
trouble.
This budget does virtually nothing in any of these areas and, in many
of these areas, in my humble opinion, significantly aggravates the
problems. The opportunity was there to do things--to do significant
things--to take significant steps, to be creative, to be imaginative,
to even be bipartisan, which would have been nice, but those
opportunities were passed.
Right upfront, this budget underfunds the troops in the field. Now,
they are not alone. The administration sent up a budget that did the
same thing. But then later, I give the administration credit for
correcting their mistake and the Secretary of Defense came forward and
said what the right number would be. Last year, the budget and the
administration reflected a correct number on what was needed for the
troops, but this budget grossly underfunds the troops in the

[[Page S2039]]

field. Even if you subscribe to the view of some of my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle, which is that these troops should come
home tomorrow and acknowledge surrender, you can't get them home. They
are going to be left in the field without the equipment they need,
without the tools they need to fight this war under the number in this
budget.
In addition, this budget dramatically expands spending. My colleague
loves to use a chart which shows two lines together and it is only 1
percent. Well, folks, 1 percent on $3 trillion is real money, at least
in New Hampshire. That is $300 billion of increased spending on the
discretionary side of the ledger. When you put in the entitlement side
of the ledger, it adds up to over $700 billion of increased spending.
Also, it gets built into the baseline. In other words, when you spend
that extra $22 billion this year, which adds up to over $300 billion
over 5 years, that becomes a figure off which the next year's spending
occurs. So it gets bigger and bigger and bigger. It grows and grows and
grows. There is no attempt in this budget to try to discipline spending
on the discretionary side of the ledger but, more importantly, there is
absolutely no attempt in this budget for disciplined spending on the
entitlement side of the ledger.
We know we are facing a fiscal meltdown as a result of the costs of
Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security when this huge generation, of
which I am a member and of which my colleague is a member, retires.
Sixty-six trillion dollars of unfunded liability will be put on the
backs of our children. What does that mean? That means their taxes will
go up so much in order to support our generation that they will be
unable to afford the lifestyle of our generation. They will not be able
to send their kids to college. They will not be able to buy that first
house. They will not be able to enjoy the comforts of a lifestyle of
affluence this country has obtained, the most affluent country in the
world, because entitlement costs will not be able to be borne.
This bill does absolutely nothing in this area. Why? Why do we leave
this problem to the next generation? We are the ones who are creating
this problem. The administration at least had the courtesy to send up a
whole series of ideas and they were all fair and they were all
reasonable and none of them impacted the vast majority of Medicare
beneficiaries or Social Security beneficiaries. Yes, they did impact
Warren Buffett. They suggested the Warren Buffetts of this world--I
guess there is only one Warren Buffett--the people who have high
incomes, the people with over $80,000 of personal income or $160,000 of
joint income, that they should pay a fair portion of the cost of their
drug insurance under Medicare. Today, they pay virtually nothing--well,
a very small amount anyway, less than a quarter of a percent--a quarter
of it. But that idea was not included in this bill, although there will
be an amendment to have it included in the bill.
Ideas on improving technology weren't included. Ideas on improving
malpractice weren't included. All ideas to get entitlement spending at
least partially under control--in fact, the administration proposals
which would have reduced the outyear liability which we are passing on
to our children and which they can't afford, reduce that liability by
almost a third in the area of Medicare, nothing in this bill,
absolutely zero.
How much saving is in this bill in discretionary accounts? Zero. How
much saving is in this bill in entitlement accounts? Zero. In fact, in
both accounts, there are significant expansions and spending.
Then there are the games. This bill is replete with games to try to
make it look like it is more reasonable and fair and cost-effective
than it is. The most obscene game being played around here is the
reconciliation instructions. Reconciliation, as we know--those of us
who work here--is the one tool of significance which the Budget
Committee has. It allows us to change how entitlement programs are
funded and slow their rate of growth--that was the purpose of
reconciliation--and do it without the changes being subject to the
filibuster rule. It is a vehicle basically directed on the purposes of
the Senate.
What has happened in this bill? There is no talk of reconciliation.
What happens on the House side? They have a $750 million reconciliation
instruction, which is a fig-leaf instruction, under which they intend
to build a massive expansion of programmatic activity. The House
doesn't need reconciliation. The House is doing the dirty work of the
Senate because the Senate leadership on the Democratic side is
unwilling to put forward what they are planning to do. It is the
ultimate, cynical game of hide and seek with the budget.
That is why I call this the fudge-it budget. There is another fudge-
it number in this budget, and that is this alleged tax gap the Senator
from North Dakota talks about so much. He talked about it last year.
Last year, he said we could get $300 billion. We got zero. In fact, we
ended up cutting the IRS last year--the other side did--so they
couldn't even collect as effectively as they were collecting the
dollars that were coming in. This tax gap number may exist at some
level, but there is no record at all that it is ever going to get
collected. And you certainly should not be taking credit for it,
claiming that is the way you are going to pay for the tax increases in
this budget.

This budget has tax increases. Again, the chairman says it is only
2.6 percent. Well, 2.6 percent on $3 trillion is approximately $800
billion. What does it mean in real terms? Well, it means they are going
to allow to expire the tax rates on capital gains, dividends, estate
taxes, R&D credit, energy credit, tuition tax credit--on a whole series
of items that benefit a lot of America.
The claim we hear from their national candidates on the Democratic
side is that we are just going to tax the rich; we can pay for
everything we want to do if we just tax the rich. If you take the top
tax rate from the present level of about 35 percent up to the Clinton
years' level of 39.6 percent, you raise $25 billion year. You cannot
pay for even 10 percent of what the Democratic party is planning to
spend with $25 billion a year. They have $300 billion in this budget
alone. Senator Obama has proposed another $300 billion of annual
increases in spending. They are short hundreds of billions of dollars
in tax revenue by taxing the rich. Where is that money going to come
from? I will tell you where. It is obvious. It is going to come from
hard-working middle-class American families. Our estimate is that this
tax package is going to cost the average small business $4,100--small
business, which is the backbone of American job creation. This budget
is a direct attack on their capacity to create jobs with that type of a
tax increase. This budget is going to cost the average senior in
America--18 million seniors--$2,200 each. That is what this package is
going to cost in tax increases to pay for the spending that is in the
program.
My colleague on the other side of the aisle is fond of saying: We
didn't raise taxes last year; our budget is not going to raise them.
This budget has built into it the expectation that taxes are going to
go up by $1.2 trillion. And then they spend the money. They spend the
money, so they have to raise the taxes. So they cannot claim it both
ways, but they try to. That is why I call it the ``fudge-it budget.''
Individuals in this country--43 million Americans--will have to pay
$2,300 each to pay for this budget. That doesn't count what Senator
Obama and Senator Clinton are proposing on the campaign trail. As I
said earlier, Obama has already proposed $300 billion of new spending
every year. That is $1.2 trillion over the 5 years. That would double
this figure, and it would mean American families would have to pay over
$4,500 a year for all of the Obama plans for spending, which mirror
Senator Clinton's plan--I don't want to just pick on Senator Obama
uniquely. On top of this budget, you would have $2,300 plus $2,300, or
$4,600 of new taxes on every family in America. Those are not rich
families. It is every family who pays taxes of any significance,
families who make more than $50,000, to put it into context.
Individuals who make more than $30,000 will have to pay this tax. The
irony is that we hear, as I mentioned, we are going to just tax the
rich.
In this budget, they already assume that the tax rates on the wealthy
are going to go from 35 percent to 39.6 percent in years 11 and 12.
Then they spend that money. So when these proposals come forward from
their national candidates that we are going to

[[Page S2040]]

put another $300 billion on the books of new spending next year and we
are going to get it from the rich--well, they have already taxed the
rich. That is already assumed in here. Who will really pay for it?
Working, average Americans and small businesses. Talk about stifling an
economy. Nothing will stifle an economy more than that.
This check reflects it. Under this budget, Americans are going to
have to write Uncle Sam a check for $2,300 a year. The spending is
built into the baseline, and the taxes are coming down the road. It is,
regrettably, in my opinion, a budget of missed opportunities and a
budget that is misdirected.
What we need in this country is the willingness to step forward and
take aggressive steps to get spending under control, especially in the
area of entitlements, and to reform our tax laws so they are more
efficient and more effective in collecting obligations. But none of
that is assumed in this budget, and none of it is attempted in this
budget.
We need to support our troops in the field. None of that is assumed
in this budget. Whether or not you agree with the policies of fighting
terrorism that the President is pursuing, you have to feel that the
troops need our support. This budget does not have that support.
We need to have a budget that doesn't constantly game itself, where
we set up alleged enforcement mechanisms, such as pay-go, and then
manipulate the budget so we go around those enforcement mechanisms. We
need to have something here that protects the integrity of the few
disciplining initiatives we have, such as reconciliation, rather than
right out of the box, with true cynicism, set up a scenario where you
are going to game the reconciliation instructions to use them to expand
the size of Government instead of controlling the rate of growth of
Government.

Most importantly, we need a budget that understands that it is not
our money, it is not the Federal Government's money, not the money of
the Members of Congress. It is the money of the people who are working
out there every day, trying to make ends meet, trying to fill up their
gas tanks and pay for the heat in their houses, trying to send their
kids to school, trying to pay their mortgage. It is their money, for
goodness' sake. Around here, it is treated as if it is our money and as
if it is a generous act on our part to let people keep their money.
Well, the purpose of the budget should be to structure itself so that
we control spending in a manner that allows us to keep taxes under
control and doesn't raise the tax burden on working American families.
We are going to be here voting a long time on a lot of issues. A lot
of these issues will be raised during those votes. I appreciate the
courtesy of the Senator from North Dakota and the way we have gotten to
this point. I, obviously, disagree with the budget as presented.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown). The Senator's time has expired.
The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, with my time remaining, let me answer a
few of the things that were said by my colleague.
No. 1, we fully fund the President's defense and war costs request.
So let's not have any misunderstanding about that for the troops.
Mr. GREGG. Will the Senator entertain a question on that?
Mr. CONRAD. I don't have time for a question.
No. 2, the Senator says it is not our money, it is the people's
money. He is exactly right. It is also the people's debt, and
unfortunately the other side has run up the people's debt.
Finally, there are no tax increases assumed in this budget. In fact,
there are significant tax reductions assumed in this budget in AMT,
energy tax, incentives, college tax--all of that is in the budget.
A final point. Mr. President, when our colleague says over and over
there are these tax increases, those tax increases must be in the
President's budget, too, because there is only a 2.6-percent difference
in the revenue.
I thank the Chair and our colleagues. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we want to announce the first 10 votes for
the information of our colleagues. This has been cleared on both sides.
The Baucus amendment will be followed by the Graham amendment, followed
by the Bingaman amendment, the Conrad amendment, the Specter amendment,
the Salazar amendment, the Kyl amendment, the Conrad amendment, the
Bunning amendment, and the Specter amendment. Those are the first 10 in
order. That takes us now to Senator Baucus.

Amendment No. 4160

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes, equally divided, on the
Baucus amendment. Senators should know that after the 1 minute Senator
Baucus speaks and Senator Gregg speaks, there will be a 15-minute vote.
Senators should understand there will be several subsequent votes.
The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
Mr. GREGG. As I understand it, when we go into the vote to come after
the first vote, it will be a hard 10-minute vote on each one.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. There will be a 5-
minute leeway on the first amendment, and we will go into subsequent
hard 10-minute votes, with 1 minute of debate on each side. Members
should stay here.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this amendment would maximize the budget's
help for America's working families. It would use the surplus to
provide tax cuts to every American taxpayer.
Our amendment provides for permanent extensions of 2001 tax cuts that
help working families, including the 10-percent bracket, marriage
penalty relief, the refundable child credit, the adoption tax credit,
and the child-care tax credit.
Our amendment provides for a new property tax deduction available to
any American homeowner, even those who don't itemize.
Our amendment includes tax relief for America's military men and
women, room to prevent the estate tax from rising above 2009 levels,
and protection from unexpected taxes for gulf coast hurricane
survivors.
Turning surplus dollars into tax relief for American families is the
right thing to do. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I have no problem with this amendment,
obviously. It extends tax cuts. I think it is a poster child for the
``fudge-it budget'' because last year the same amendment was offered.
Actually, after that budget was adopted, none of those taxes cuts were
extended. So now we are doing it again. It is sort of like the gift
that keeps giving, reoffering this amendment when it has no actual
impact or nothing comes from it. We are for it because it reduces some
of the tax burdens in this bill, but it still leaves in place, by our
calculation, hundreds of billions of dollars of new taxes on working
Americans, which will lead to significant tax increases for working
Americans because this doesn't relieve all of the tax burdens in this
bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time last expired. The question is on
agreeing to the Baucus amendment.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 1, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 42 Leg.]

YEAS--99

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby

[[Page S2041]]

Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

NAYS--1

Feingold

The amendment (No. 4160) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4170

Mr. BROWN. There are now 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to
the vote on the Graham amendment, No. 4170.
Who yields time?
We are going to have 2 minutes of debate on each amendment. The
Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I have a modification to the amendment,
which I think has been cleared, that I would like to send to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

On page 3, line 10, decrease the amount by $245,000,000.
On page 3, line 11, decrease the amount by $949,000,000.
On page 3, line 12, decrease the amount by $3,215,000,000.
On page 3, line 13, decrease the amount by $93,791,000,000.
On page 3, line 14, decrease the amount by
$127,024,000,000.
On page 3, line 15, decrease the amount by
$151,137,000,000.
On page 3, line 19, decrease the amount by $245,000,000.
On page 3, line 20, decrease the amount by $949,000,000.
On page 3, line 21, decrease the amount by $3,215,000,000.
On page 3, line 22, decrease the amount by $93,791,000,000.
On page 3, line 23, decrease the amount by
$127,024,000,000.
On page 3, line 24, decrease the amount by
$151,137,000,000.
On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $1,900,000.
On page 4, line 5, increase the amount by $18,000,000.
On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 4, line 7, increase the amount by $2,487,000,000.
On page 4, line 8, increase the amount by $8,005,000,000.
On page 4, line 9, increase the amount by $15,207,000,000.
On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $1,900,000.
On page 4, line 14, increase the amount by $18,000,000.
On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 4, line 16, increase the amount by $2,487,000,000.
On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $8,005,000,000.
On page 4, line 18, increase the amount by $15,207,000,000.
On page 4, line 22, increase the amount by $247,000,000.
On page 4, line 23, increase the amount by $967,000,000.
On page 4, line 24, increase the amount by $3,325,000,000.
On page 4, line 25, increase the amount by $96,278,000,000.
On page 5, line 1, increase the amount by $135,079,000,000.
On page 5, line 2, increase the amount by $166,344,000,000.
On page 5, line 7, increase the amount by $247,000,000.
On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $1,214,000,000.
On page 5, line 9, increase the amount by $4,539,000,000.
On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by
$100,817,000,000.
On page 5, line 11, increase the amount by
$235,846,000,000.
On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by
$402,190,000,000.
On page 5, line 15, increase the amount by $247,000,000.
On page 5, line 16, increase the amount by $1,214,000,000.
On page 5, line 17, increase the amount by $4,539,000,000.
On page 5, line 18, increase the amount by
$100,817,000,000.
On page 5, line 19, increase the amount by
$235,846,000,000.
On page 5, line 20, increase the amount by
$402,190,000,000.
On page 26, line 12, increase the amount by $1,900,000.
On page 26, line 13, increase the amount by $1,900,000.
On page 26, line 16, increase the amount by $18,000,000.
On page 26, line 17, increase the amount by $18,000,000.
On page 26, line 20, increase the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 26, line 21, increase the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 26, line 24, increase the amount by $2,487,000,000.
On page 26, line 25, increase the amount by $2,487,000,000.
On page 27, line 3, increase the amount by $8,005,000,000.
On page 27, line 4, increase the amount by $8,005,000,000.
On page 27, line 7, increase the amount by $15,207,000,000.
On page 27, line 8, increase the amount by $15,207,000,000.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I know we are all busy and trying to catch
up on a lot of business, but in 1 minute this is what I am trying to
do. This amendment is not about me, it is about a lot of people paying
taxes, and their taxes are going to go up if we don't pass this
amendment.
The Baucus amendment passed 99 to 1. That was good for America. We
are filling in a gap that exists when it comes to the budget and
protecting tax cuts. My amendment would extend through 2013 the
marginal rate cuts that are now in law. The current law is 25 percent.
If we don't pass my amendment, in 2011 the tax will go up to 28
percent, a 10-percent increase, 35 percent becomes 39.6 percent, and
that means 23 million Americans are going to pay higher taxes.
The estate tax relief in this amendment would protect families and
small businesses from losing, through estate taxes, their deductions
and exemptions. It will keep the rate at 45 percent versus 50 percent.
The capital gains rate. Nine million people depend on capital gains
to help support their family. The rates go up to 20 percent, if my
amendment does not pass, versus 15.
Dividend tax rates are great for our economy. We lock in the dividend
tax rate cuts we have achieved the last couple years. Twenty-four
million people are affected.
Small business expensing. Under the current law, you get $250,000
under small business expensing. If my amendment doesn't pass, it goes
to $25,000.
There is a lot at stake if you vote against my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I checked with the two managers, and on the
amendments that are pending, I ask unanimous consent that there be no
second-degree amendments on the list of amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Who yields time?
The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the Graham amendment, well-intentioned as
it is, is the road to fiscal irresponsibility. This will absolutely
blow a hole in the budget. We now have balance by 2012, and we maintain
balance in 2013. If you adopt the Graham amendment--because none of it
is paid for, there are no offsets, no spending reductions, no other
revenue--it is put on the debt.
So if you want to borrow more from China, if you want to borrow more
from Japan, vote for the Graham amendment. If you want to balance the
budget, if you want to get this country back on the road to fiscal
responsibility, vote no.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. All time has
expired.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to
be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the Graham amendment. This is a 10-
minute vote, and the 10 minutes will be enforced.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr.
Kerry) is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 52, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 43 Leg.]

YEAS--47

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter

[[Page S2042]]

Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--52

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--1

Kerry

The amendment (No. 4170), as modified, was rejected.

Amendment No. 4173

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are now 2 minutes of debate, equally
divided, prior to a vote on the Bingaman amendment, No. 4173. The
Senate will come to order.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, this amendment is to raise the caps in
the appropriate accounts so there is room in this budget for the
President's requested levels of spending for the National Science
Foundation and for the Office of Science in the Department of Energy,
for science and math education, for research and development. It is an
amendment I am proposing for myself and Senator Alexander, Senator
Domenici, Senator Kennedy, Senator Mikulski, Senator Ensign, Senator
Durbin, Senator Landrieu, Senator Feinstein, Senator Lieberman, and
Senator Schumer.
This is bipartisan. It is something we should do. It follows on to
the America COMPETES Act that we passed last year.
Let me defer to Senator Alexander the remainder of the time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. Who
yields time?
Mr. CONRAD. On opposition time, I yield 30 seconds to the Senator.
Mr. GREGG. I look forward to the Senator's opposition.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, this is another example of Senators in
this Chamber working together on an important matter and getting a good
result. It makes room for us to meet the President's number, to keep
our investment in science and technology so we can keep our brainpower
advantage and keep jobs from going overseas.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. Is there
further debate? There are 30 seconds left for the opposition.
All time has expired. The question is on agreeing to the Bingaman
amendment.
The amendment (No. 4173) was agreed to.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we can thank Senators Bingaman and
Alexander for setting a very good example, of taking an amendment on a
voice vote.

Amendment No. 4190

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on the Conrad amendment, No. 4190. Who yields
time? The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the alternative minimum tax will affect an
additional 20 million families if it is not dealt with. In the budget
resolution, we have a 1-year patch to prevent additional families from
being hit. This is at a cost of some $62 billion. For the outyears, we
are providing in this amendment for a reserve fund that is fully offset
so it does not add to the deficit and debt. I ask my colleagues to
support this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, we need to defeat this amendment. This is not
the usual AMT fix we are used to. This actually repeals rates of the
AMT that were put into effect in 1993. The reality is we are not going
to increase taxes in order to pay for the relief that would be provided
to taxpayers here. This points out the difference between the Specter
amendment, which we will deal with next, and the Conrad amendment.
I urge my colleagues to support the Specter amendment because it is
the real deal. It is the real way we will deal with AMT, rather than
the phony way that is presented by a mere indication that we will find
revenues somewhere to offset against this tax cut. The question the
majority would have to answer is: What taxes are you going to raise in
order to pay for this rate reduction for the people who would otherwise
pay the AMT?
There is certainly no suggestion that there is a spending cut in the
offing. Therefore, what taxes would be raised to pay for this?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Conrad
amendment.
The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the Specter amendment puts it on the debt.
The Conrad amendment is offset and paid for. I urge colleagues to vote
for the Conrad amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I believe it is the practice of the Senate,
under the 2-minute rule, that one person speaks for their time, the
other person speaks for their time, and there isn't a tradition that
you reserve 10 seconds or 15 seconds. If that is going to be the
situation, we are going to go back and forth and everybody has to have
a last word, we are going to be here for a long time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota has not consumed
his entire minute.
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. That is the observation I was going to make; we had time
remaining on our side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No.
4190, the Conrad amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Biden) is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tester). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 46, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 44 Leg.]

YEAS--53

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--46

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NOT VOTING--1

Biden

The amendment (No. 4190) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4189

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on the Specter amendment No. 4189. Who yields
time?
The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, my amendment would reduce the alternative
minimum tax rate from 28 to 24 percent. When the tax increase was
enacted in 1993, it raised the rates and that has caught many more
people in the snare, because the alternative minimum tax was not
indexed for inflation.
I provided for no offset, because this tax was never intended to
capture the

[[Page S2043]]

millions of people to whom it now applies. Originally, it was intended
to apply to a very small number of people. So, as a matter of equity,
we ought not to have an offset when the tax was not intended to apply
at all.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. The amendment that has just passed has dealt with this
issue and done it in a deficit-neutral way. The Specter amendment, as
he correctly describes, would not be paid for, would not be offset, but
would simply add to the debt $185 billion and would mean this budget
would not be in balance for any one of the 5 years.
I urge my colleagues to reject the Specter amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back. The question is on
agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Texas (Mr. Cornyn).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 50, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 45 Leg.]

YEAS--49

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--50

Akaka
Baucus
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--1

Cornyn

The amendment (No. 4189) was rejected.
Mr. MENENDEZ. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
Mr. GREGG. I object. I object to laying it on the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
Mr. GREGG. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 51, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 46 Leg.]

YEAS--49

Akaka
Baucus
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--51

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now is on the motion to
reconsider.
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GREGG. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President: Where actually do we
stand right now?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to
reconsider amendment No. 4189.
The motion is not debatable.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, what is the effect of agreeing to the
motion to reconsider?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the motion to reconsider is agreed to, the
Senate will revote on amendment No. 4189.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to reconsider.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 50, nays 50, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 47 Leg.]

YEAS--50

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--50

Akaka
Baucus
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
The VICE PRESIDENT. On this question, the yeas are 50, the nays are
50. The Senate being equally divided, the Vice President votes in the
affirmative, and the motion is agreed to.
The question now is on agreeing to the amendment upon
reconsideration. The yeas and nays, having been ordered previously, are
automatic.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 51, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 48 Leg.]

YEAS--49

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--51

Akaka
Baucus
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
The amendment (No. 4189) was rejected.

[[Page S2044]]

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.

Amendment No. 4196, As Modified

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we now go to the Salazar amendment No.
4196. I see the Senator from Colorado in the Chamber.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Colorado is recognized.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in support
of amendment No. 4196. This is about estate tax reform and providing
the Finance Committee, Chairman Baucus, the opportunity to craft a
package that makes sense. This will help make sure that our farmers and
ranchers are able to stay on the ranch, that family businesses will be
able to keep their family businesses together, and that we can provide
certainty for the future in terms of those who will be hit with the
estate tax.
There is an alternative amendment that will be coming up by our
friend from Arizona, Senator Kyl. The problem with that amendment is it
is not paid for. We will then continue to build upon this mountain of
debt, which has already reached $10 trillion in the last 7 years.
This amendment is paid for and I urge my colleagues to support it.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, the question here is whether we are serious
about estate tax reform. We went through the exercise last year and
passed it in the budget, and we didn't do anything. We are going to
repeat that same thing this year unless we commit ourselves to actually
passing a bill, saying we are going to raise taxes--because I am sure
we are not going to reduce spending--and that is akin to saying it is
not going to happen. Once again, we would be passing an amendment we
know we are not going to act on. We need to be accountable to the
American people and pass something in the budget that we know we are
going to do, with real legislation.
I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment and to vote for
the next amendment, which is the real vote in favor of estate tax
return.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tester). The question is on agreeing to
the Salazar amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 38, nays 62, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 49 Leg.]

YEAS--38

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Casey
Clinton
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Feingold
Feinstein
Inouye
Johnson
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Salazar
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Wyden

NAYS--62

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bingaman
Bond
Brown
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Cardin
Carper
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kyl
Levin
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Whitehouse
Wicker
The amendment (No. 4196), as modified, was rejected.

Amendment No. 4191

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on the Kyl amendment No. 4191. Who yields time?
The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, last year this amendment received 56 votes,
Democratic and Republican votes. It was then in the form of a motion to
instruct conferees, but the provisions are the same.
This is the amendment on the estate tax that has a top rate not to
exceed 35 percent, and it has a $5 million exemption for each spouse,
for a total of $10 million.
This amendment is endorsed by small business groups such as the NFIB
and by other pro-estate tax reform groups.
I hope my colleagues will agree it is a way to send a very strong
signal through the budget process that we are serious about reforming
the estate tax this year.
I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote against the
amendment of my friend from Arizona because at the end of the day, it
does not hold up to the principle of fiscal responsibility. All that
the amendment of my friend will do is continue to make the mountain of
debt bigger and bigger. It is a mountain of debt that is already at $10
trillion and going beyond. The pay-go rules we have in this Chamber are
important for us to maintain if we are going to be fiscally responsible
stewards of America's financial treasure.
I urge my colleagues to vote no on the Kyl amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona has 17 seconds
remaining.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague's comments. The
question is what taxes are we going to raise in order to provide tax
relief. I don't think it is realistic that we are going to raise taxes,
and I certainly don't expect we will reduce spending. If we are serious
about it, we need to send a signal through this amendment if we want to
reform the estate tax.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado has 22 seconds
remaining.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I respond to my friend from Arizona, at
the end of the day, if we are going to be fiscally responsible in the
Senate, we have to pay for those items that are creating this mountain
of debt. We are either serious about paying down the debt in this
country and getting a handle on the fiscal responsibility of the last 8
years or we are not. Senator Conrad has been right in terms of pay-go.
I ask my colleagues to vote no.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No.
4191.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 50, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 50 Leg.]

YEAS--50

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Landrieu
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--50

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Has every Senator voted? Does any Senator wish
to change his or her vote?
With 49 in the affirmative, 48 in the negative, the----
Mr. REID. Mr. President, how am I recorded?

[[Page S2045]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Mr. Reid of Nevada is recorded in the
negative.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, the time of the vote has expired.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time has expired. The clerk will tally the
vote.
Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, how am I recorded?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recorded in
the negative.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: Once the Presiding
Officer has announced the clerks will tally the vote, is the vote not
concluded?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators are permitted to change their vote.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, might I inquire as to whether any of the
persons who have cast a vote since the Presiding Officer made that
comment have changed their vote? The reality is they cast their vote
after the time for voting expired by at least 4 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I appreciate my friend, the distinguished
Senator from Arizona, but it has always been the standard here, when
there is a close vote--and this is a close vote, I have to acknowledge
that; I think now it is 50 to 50--people have the opportunity to change
their vote.
We are doing our very best to hold it to the 10-minute limit. To go
through the charade of reconsidering because somebody is--it is really
unnecessary. This is the vote total, and I think people just have to be
very patient. We are going to adhere to the 10-minute limit as much as
we can. Everyone knows that if there is a problem on the other side, we
do the same thing. We are not playing favorites with anyone.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With 50 votes in the affirmative and 50 in the
negative, amendment No. 4191 is not agreed to.
The amendment (No. 4191) was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to the vote on the Conrad amendment, No. 4204, as
modified.
Mr. KYL. Parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. REID. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the motion to lay on the
table?
Without objection, the motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. KYL. Parliamentary inquiry for the benefit of the Senators who
are here.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, if we are within two or three votes of a tie
vote, is it going to be the rule that the Chair will leave the time for
voting open by at least 4 minutes, as was just explained?
My second question is, Given the fact that the time was closed and
Senator Cornyn was not given the opportunity to vote earlier, what
would the Chair's opinion be with respect to having a revote on that?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, would the Senator be kind enough to direct
his inquiry, through the Chair, to me?
Mr. KYL. I had a parliamentary inquiry, but I will be happy to always
have the majority leader comment on whatever.
Mr. REID. I am sorry, I think a lot of us didn't hear the question.
Mr. KYL. I am sorry, Mr. President, I am perhaps confused because I
have two questions.
The first was, since the time for voting had clearly expired by at
least 4 minutes and the vote was within two or three of being tied and
the majority leader said it was the case that Members could continue to
change their votes or vote if it was a close vote, whether we had now
established a precedent for the remainder of the day that if we are
within two or three of a tie vote, even though we are 4 minutes beyond
the time for voting, that the Chair would then, according to this
precedent, allow people to change their vote or cast a vote?
Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I can just respond.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. And certainly I am not taking the place of the Chair. I
personally didn't know if Senator Cornyn was coming to vote or not. If
you or Senator McConnell or anyone else had indicated that he was on
his way, or one of those we have heard that of before--on his way--no
one was trying to take advantage of anyone on the vote. No one was
trying to take advantage of anyone. But I think we went through a lot
of wasted time, and I probably would have done the same thing had I
been in your position. But nobody was trying to take advantage of
Senator Cornyn. It was late, and that is too bad. We will try to be as
fair as we can.

At this stage, we have about 25 votes left.
Mr. GREGG. We have about 40 votes left.
Mr. REID. Okay, so 40. That was the last count I looked at. And we
are going to try to move through these as expeditiously as possible.
There will be other close votes, and we are going to try to be as fair
as we can to you and to us. So no one is trying to take advantage of
anyone, and I think there is an order in effect. The order is we are
going to have 10-minute votes.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, if I could just address this question to the
majority leader. That is exactly the question I had. Since we announced
the 10 minutes, in the last vote we went over by about 5 minutes. We
need to be consistent and our Members need to know what the rules are
going to be. We made an exception here.
My inquiry to the Chair is whether, as a result of that exception,
which did change the result of the vote, that the precedent would now
be that we actually would have up to 15 minutes to cast votes.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, certainly the Chair can respond to this, but
there is an order now in effect that we are going to do 10-minute
votes. Everybody agreed to that this morning.
I would simply say this: I do say, and I am glad the Senator from
Arizona raises this as an issue, that there is not time for lunch,
there is no time for meetings, unless you go to the reception area. In
the future, I think people are going to have to start missing votes. It
is really not fair to both sides if we have people simply off doing
other things. Everyone is busy, and the reason we have the 10-minute
rule is because we need to work our way through these votes.
So I think you have made a very good point, I say to my friend. I
think we need to stick to the 10-minute rule. So we will stick with the
10-minute rule. If you have a problem when people are here shifting
votes around--but I think they should be in the Chamber--that is how we
will proceed. If anyone can figure a better way to do it, I am happy to
listen, but I think the 10-minute rule should apply.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, one final question. I think I need to address
this to the Chair as a purely parliamentary inquiry; that is, once the
clerk's tally has been requested by the Presiding Officer, is the vote
closed or not, except for Members who might wish to change their vote?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The conventional practice of the Senate has
been that Senators have been permitted to vote or change their vote at
that time.
The Senator from North Dakota.

Amendment No. 4204, as Modified

Mr. CONRAD. In regular order, is my amendment next?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to the vote on the Conrad amendment, No. 4204, as
modified.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the alternative I have offered would
provide for a reserve fund that would allow the repeal of the 1993 tax
increase on Social Security benefits in a way that would protect Social
Security and Medicare and not increase the deficit or the debt over the
period of the resolution.
I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who rises in opposition? The Senator from
Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, this is a very interesting amendment,
since I have had this amendment the last two times a budget went
through the Senate. Senator Conrad, the chairman of

[[Page S2046]]

the Budget Committee, has offered this alternative, but I would note
that it contains an instruction that he himself, as chairman, should
come up with the savings.
This is a very odd instruction that we put in the budget resolution
because it does not say where the savings will occur. I hope he has no
intention of raising taxes on other Americans to pay for this
amendment.
I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk will call the
roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Salazar). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 46, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 51 Leg.]

YEAS--53

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--46

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NOT VOTING--1

Byrd

The amendment (No. 4204) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and move to
lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4192, as Modified

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on the Bunning amendment No. 4192.
The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, there is a modification at the desk to my
amendment. The Chairman has been notified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

On page 3, line 11, decrease the amount by $14,300,000,000.
On page 3, line 12, decrease the amount by $15,600,000,000.
On page 3, line 13, decrease the amount by $17,500,000,000.
On page 3, line 14, decrease the amount by $19,800,000,000.
On page 3, line 15, decrease the amount by $21,600,000,000.
On page 3, line 20, decrease the amount by $14,300,000,000.
On page 3, line 21, decrease the amount by $15,600,000,000.
On page 3, line 22, decrease the amount by $17,500,000,000.
On page 3, line 23, decrease the amount by $19,800,000,000.
On page 3, line 24, decrease the amount by $21,600,000,000.
On page 4, line 5, decrease the amount by $14,300,000,000.
On page 4, line 6, decrease the amount by $15,600,000,000.
On page 4, line 7, decrease the amount by $17,500,000,000.
On page 4, line 8, decrease the amount by $19,800,000,000.
On page 4, line 9, decrease the amount by $21,600,000,000.
On page 4, line 14, decrease the amount by $14,300,000,000.
On page 4, line 15, decrease the amount by $15,600,000,000.
On page 4, line 16, decrease the amount by $17,500,000,000.
On page 4, line 17, decrease the amount by $19,800,000,000.
On page 4, line 18, decrease the amount by $21,600,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by
$14,300,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by
$14,300,000,000.
On page 27, line 20, decrease the amount by
$15,600,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by
$15,600,000,000.
On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by
$17,500,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by
$17,500,000,000.
On page 28, line 3, decrease the amount by $19,800,000,000.
On page 28, line 4, decrease the amount by $19,800,000,000.
On page 28, line 7, decrease the amount by $21,600,000,000.
On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $21,600,000,000.
On page 32, line 10, decrease the amount by
$21,500,000,000.
On page 32, line 11, decrease the amount by
$14,300,000,000.

Mr. BUNNING. This is the third time I have addressed on the Senate
floor this amendment, the unfair tax that has been on the senior
citizens of this country since 1993 when the additional 35 percent was
put on. This time it is paid for, not like the last one we voted on.
This time it is paid for in my modification.
It specifically states it is paid for by an across-the-board cut in
discretionary spending. We do not touch the entitlement spending, but
discretionary spending is cut by the amount of money we need to pay for
this cut for our senior citizens.
This is the real cut of taxes for senior citizens. The last one was a
``cover some part of your body'' rather than the real kind of tax cut.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, there are real cuts, the Senator is right
about that. This would cut, across the board by $21 billion, education,
veterans' health, homeland security, law enforcement. If you want to do
that, vote for the Bunning amendment.
I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
Mr. BUNNING. But the other one did not pay for it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment,
as modified.
Mr. CONRAD. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 53, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 52 Leg.]

YEAS--47

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--53

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
The amendment (No. 4192), as modified, was rejected.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the previous vote.
Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

amendment no. 4203

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on the Specter amendment No. 4203.
The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I offer this amendment on behalf of 31
Senators. It adds $2.1 billion to NIH funding which would bring it to a
total of

[[Page S2047]]

$32 billion. NIH has been grossly underfunded for many years. Enormous
progress was made during the NIH doubling; major advances on cancer,
Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's. It also adds $1 billion for LIHEAP, which
is significantly underfunded, bringing the total to $3.5 billion. I
urge support of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, it is important to note this is a
reprioritization within the budget. I happen to agree with this
reprioritization, but it comes out of what is known as the 920 account,
which means in order to pay for this, it is an across-the-board cut to
all other accounts. I think the Senator is correct that if we are going
to prioritize spending, I am willing to do an across-the-board cut to
all accounts to put more money into NIH and more money into LIHEAP. I
suggest we take it on a voice vote, unless the Senator wants a recorded
vote.
Mr. SPECTER. I ask for the yeas and nays. I think it is important
people know the strength of this body's support for the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is all time yielded back?
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. I encourage Members to support the amendment. The Senator
has made a very powerful case for it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No.
4203. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
The result was announced--yeas 95, nays 4, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 53 Leg.]

YEAS--95

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

NAYS--4

Carper
DeMint
Inhofe
Kyl

NOT VOTING--1

Vitter

The amendment (No. 4203) was agreed to.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Ms. STABENOW. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the next amendment is an amendment by
Senator Dorgan; then there would be a side by side to Senator
Alexander's energy reserve amendment; then the Senator Alexander
amendment; then the Senator Kennedy amendment; followed by Senator
Sununu; followed by Senator Lincoln; followed by Senator Alexander; a
side by side to Alexander; then Alexander; then Menendez; then
Sessions; then Cornyn; then Pryor; then Allard. That is the regular
order previously entered, for the notice of Senators.
We would note that none of them are subject to second degrees. We
will make that request. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
none of these amendments be subject to second degrees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Nebraska). Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, that takes us to the Dorgan amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.

Amendment No. 4198

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, this amendment has to do with Indian
health care. We have both a trust responsibility and treaty
responsibilities for the health care of American Indians. They are the
first Americans.
Let me tell you how we meet our responsibility. We also have a
responsibility to provide health care for incarcerated Federal
prisoners. We spend twice as much money for health care for our
incarcerated prisoners as we do to meet our promise to American Indians
for health care. This amendment provides $1 billion restoration of
funding for the Indian health care program. It is paid for by a general
reduction in function 920.
Let me say again, people are dying as a result of the underfunding
for health care for American Indians. It is a promise we have made, and
it is long past the time we keep that promise. This amendment is a step
in that direction.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks recognition in opposition?
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, the Senator from North Dakota has made an
exceptional case regarding the failure of the Indian health program,
especially as it relates to his citizenry and other citizenry
throughout this country. He has pointed out that it involves rationing,
poor medical care, and that it involves inconsistent and spotty medical
care. I think he has probably made one of the best cases you could
possibly make for why we do not want the Federal Government running
health care. The Indian health care system is a Federal system.
So however people vote on this amendment, I think we should
understand that this vote is a condemnation of the idea of
nationalizing our health care system.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 4198.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Montana (Mr. Baucus) is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 69, nays 30, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 54 Leg.]

YEAS--69

Akaka
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Casey
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Craig
Crapo
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Harkin
Inhofe
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCain
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Smith
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Tester
Thune
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

NAYS--30

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bond
Bunning
Burr
Carper
Chambliss
Corker
Cornyn
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Sununu
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NOT VOTING--1

Baucus

The amendment (No. 4198) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4329

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4329.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

[[Page S2048]]

The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson], for himself, Mr.
Lautenberg, Mr. Salazar, and Mr. Menendez, proposes an
amendment numbered 4329.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to improve energy
efficiency and production)

At the end of title III, add the following:

SEC. 3___. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND TO IMPROVE ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTION.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the Chairman of
the Senate Committee on the Budget may revise the
allocations, aggregates, and other levels in this resolution
by the amounts provided by a bill, joint resolution,
amendment, motion, or conference report that would
encourage--
(1) consumers to replace old conventional wood stoves with
new clean wood, pellet, or corn stoves certified by the
Environmental Protection Agency;
(2) consumers to install smart electricity meters in homes
and businesses;
(3) the capture and storage of carbon dioxide emissions
from coal projects; and
(4) the development of oil and natural gas resources
beneath the outer Continental Shelf in areas not covered by a
Presidential or Congressional moratorium.
(b) Deficit Neutrality.--Subsection (a) applies only if the
legislation described in subsection (a) would not increase
the deficit over the period of the total of fiscal years 2008
through 2013 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2008
through 2018.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 2 minutes of debate equally divided.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, the Alexander amendment that is
coming up unwisely attempts to override the moratorium we have which
Congress adopted and the President signed 3 months ago to prevent
commercial oil shale leasing, before the impacts of those proposed
technologies are known and before the R&D projects in Colorado or Utah
have produced any results. So my amendment takes that out.
My amendment also takes out his portion, where he is going to allow
oil and gas drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf. Senator Alexander
is going to change that just to have gas drilling off Virginia. But I
would argue, that is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent and
what we fight about each year: Oil drilling off the coast.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee is recognized.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, there are only 2 ways to bring down the
price of $3.50 gasoline and to keep electricity from going up. One is
to reduce demand and one is to increase supply.
The Senator from Florida and I agree on our amendments on several
provisions, but he would take out the parts that will increase the
supply of natural gas and increase the supply of oil, which will tend
to reduce the price of gasoline and reduce the price of natural gas and
make us less dependent on people in other countries who are trying to
kill us.
I urge a ``no'' vote if you want lower energy prices.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to
be.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Klobuchar). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 56, nays 43, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 55 Leg.]

YEAS--56

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dole
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Martinez
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--43

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Landrieu
Lugar
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker

NOT VOTING--1

McCain

The amendment (No. 4329) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4207, as Modified

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes of debate, equally
divided, prior to a vote on amendment No. 4207, offered by the Senator
from Tennessee, Mr. Alexander.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I have sent a modification of my
amendment to the desk.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

At the end of title III, add the following:

SEC. 3___. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND TO IMPROVE ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTION.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the Chairman of
the Senate Committee on the Budget may revise the
allocations, aggregates, and other levels in this resolution
by the amounts provided by a bill, joint resolution,
amendment, motion, or conference report that would
encourage--
(1) consumers to replace old conventional wood stoves with
new clean wood, pellet, or corn stoves certified by the
Environmental Protection Agency;
(2) consumers to install smart electricity meters in homes
and businesses;
(3) the capture and storage of carbon dioxide emissions
from coal projects;
(4) the development of natural gas resources beneath the
outer Continental Shelf but only off the coastline of the
State of Virginia; and
(5) the development of oil shale resources on public land
pursuant to section 369(d) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 15927(d)), without regard to section 433 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161).
(b) Deficit Neutrality.--Subsection (a) applies only if the
legislation described in subsection (a) would not increase
the deficit over the period of the total of fiscal years 2008
through 2013 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2008
through 2018.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, my amendment limits the encouragement
of the development of natural gas resources beneath the Outer
Continental Shelf to the coastline, off the coastline of the State of
Virginia.
Madam President, the estimates are that this year 400 billion
American dollars are going overseas to buy oil. This amendment has some
conservation measures in it, but it also allows us to proceed with the
Department of Interior to develop oil from oil shale in the western
part of the United States. It allows Virginia, which has asked to do
it, to explore for natural gas off the coastline of Virginia. A ``yes''
vote is to bring down $3.50 gasoline prices. The supply of oil and gas
is important if we want to bring down the price of oil and gas to
Americans and make us less dependent upon foreign oil.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I point out that the
Alexander amendment takes away the sensible moratorium, which Congress
just adopted and the President signed 3 months ago, which prevents
commercial oil shale leasing before the impacts of those technologies
are known, with the R&D projects in Colorado and Utah. It further
starts the process of drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, which
you just protected by adopting my amendment. By doing what Senator
Alexander said, the camel's nose is under the tent to start drilling
off of Virginia.
I urge a ``no'' vote on Senator Alexander's side-by-side amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.
Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have 1
minute to answer the statement made by the Senator from Florida.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. MENENDEZ. Reserving the right to object, if the Senator will
amend his request for a minute on each side, I would be happy not to
object. I would like to talk about it too.

[[Page S2049]]

Mr. DOMENICI. I don't care if the Senator wants 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to a minute on each side?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.
Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, what happened in this case, with
reference to shale oil, is the United States has as much shale oil in
these two States--Colorado and Utah--as the Saudi Arabians have oil. We
had that arranged in our Energy bill, where it was being researched by
major American oil companies. In the dead of night, the appropriators
changed the law in an appropriations bill and put a moratorium on final
regulations so that those who are investing money to see if we can
produce this with $100-a-barrel oil out there, or not, they have to
look at a moratorium as to whether they should invest money.
There should not be a moratorium. It is protected by law. This is
somebody up in one of these States putting a moratorium on in
appropriations with nobody around. This Senator wasn't there. If I were
there, it would not have happened. We would not have had a bill. We
would have had to filibuster that bill because it is so wrong to, in
appropriations, say no to the largest body of ore in America that could
substitute for crude oil. You might say: Why didn't we do it before? We
didn't do it because oil wasn't high enough. Now it is.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey is recognized.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I oppose this amendment because what
this will do, as Senator Nelson said, is undo a quarter century of
bipartisan agreement where there is a moratorium on the Outer
Continental Shelf, both west and east. If we want to end our addiction
and if we care about prices, then don't do it by striking another vein,
ultimately, of the same energy resource. You do it by considering
alternatives. This amendment does nothing about that, but it does
undermine the moratorium in the Outer Continental Shelf.
I yield to my colleague from Colorado.
Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I urge my colleagues to vote no on this
amendment because it deals with the State of Colorado and the oil shale
reserves there. We have a thoughtful way to move forward with that
program. This is putting the horse ahead of the cart. This is the wrong
way to go.
I urge a ``no'' note.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment,
as modified.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd,
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 51, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 56 Leg.]

YEAS--47

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Domenici
Dorgan
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Kyl
Landrieu
Lugar
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--51

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dole
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Martinez
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4207), as modified, was rejected.

Amendment No. 4151

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I believe the pending amendment is the
amendment I offered earlier; am I correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Amendment No. 4151. There is 2 minutes of
debate equally divided.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, everyone is aware of the credit crisis
and its impact on homeowners. This amendment is designed to ensure that
the crisis does not impact students.
The amendment ensures that Congress can act to provide low-interest
loans to students who need them. It will bring stability and security
to our higher education system. My amendment strengthens the Federal
Student Loan Program so that secure, low-interest student loans will
always be available to Main Street America, even when Wall Street is in
turmoil.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. COBURN. Madam President, the only cost in this country that has
risen faster than medical care has been college education. There is no
shortage of student loan money under Government-guaranteed loans. We
sent $77 billion to colleges and universities last year, half of them
through earmarks.
The more money we send to universities, the higher the tuitions go.
That is one of the reasons it is higher than it is today. According to
the Secretary, in a study issued this last week, there is no shortage
of available student loans among the federally backed Student Loan
Guarantee Program. There is a slight shortage in the 10-percent
private.
This amendment does not address or increase at all the availability
that is already there. So we are not doing anything with this amendment
other than spending the very money these kids are going to have to pay
back. By borrowing now, they will have to pay it back two and
threefold.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Twenty seconds remains.
The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, as I understand, the time has expired.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No.
4151.
The amendment (No. 4151) was agreed to.
Mr. KENNEDY. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided on the
Sununu amendment.
The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
Mr. GREGG. Madam President, as I understand it, Senator Sununu and
Senator Kerry are discussing this amendment. I suggest we move to the
next regular order item, if there is no objection, which is Senator
Lincoln's amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 4194

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided on the
Lincoln amendment, No. 4194.
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I will give a moment to the Senator to
collect herself and indicate that we are making very good progress. We
have a long way to go. We thank colleagues for being so cooperative,
but I do indicate that if we have any hope of getting done tonight,
even late tonight, it is going to take forbearance on the part of
colleagues because we have probably 45, even 50 amendments still
pending. That means at three an hour--my colleagues can do the math--we
will be well into tomorrow. I ask colleagues, if there is an ability to
withhold amendments on this vehicle for another vehicle, that would
certainly be helpful.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas is recognized.

[[Page S2050]]

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, my amendment is a simple one, and that
is to better ensure that the men and women who have so courageously
served our Nation in uniform receive the benefits to which they are
entitled, and certainly have earned, in a more timely manner.
I join my colleague Senator Snowe in offering this amendment. Last
year, we got around $70 million in the budget resolution and then again
through the appropriations to specifically go to the Veterans Benefits
Administration to hire more claims processing staff.
We have seen a tremendous backlog. I know other Senators in their
offices and in their casework find the same situation I do, and that
is, these incredible men and women who have served our Nation in
uniform and done so in such a courageous and brave way are not getting
the benefits they need or deserve. And they are not getting them in a
timely way--anywhere from 180 days to more in terms of backlog.

The VBA certainly needs more resources. They need the resources to
train these individuals who are working with them to ensure that those
benefits are delivered to these brave men and women.
I certainly thank the chairman and the ranking member for working
with us, and certainly Senator Snowe, and urge my colleagues to support
the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
The Senator from Maryland is recognized.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I am a cosponsor of the Lincoln,
Mikulski, and Snowe amendment.
Our military people don't stand in line when they have to serve this
country, and they shouldn't have to stand in line to file for their
disability claims. This is outrageous. We need to put enough money into
the checkbook to protect the troops over there and when they come back
here.
Let us vote for this Lincoln amendment. If you support the troops,
let us end the backlog.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 4194) was agreed to.
Mr. GREGG. Madam President, I believe we are back to the Sununu
amendment. We have a side-by-side, I understand, with Senator Kerry.

Amendment No. 4221

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided on the Sununu amendment.
The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
Mr. SUNUNU. Madam President, this is an amendment that simply adds
language to the deficit-neutral fund that emphasizes health care IT.
We all know the value of technology and improving health care
efficiency, lowering costs, and reducing medical errors. Our language--
my language--would ensure that health care IT focuses first on
electronic prescriptions. We know we can reduce the number of errors,
the mistakes in prescribing, improve the quality of care, and improve
health care costs for all our seniors by moving to electronic
prescribing, with incentives for doctors, grants for doctors to
accelerate this process.
This is based on legislation introduced by Senators Kerry and
Stabenow on the Democratic side and Senator Ensign and me on the
Republican side. It is a strong bipartisan effort that will save money
and improve the cost of care. I know Senator Kerry has a similar
amendment that adds further language to this section, and I hope the
Senate will accept both of the amendments.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, we have no objection to the amendment of
the Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GREGG. I ask unanimous consent that the Sununu amendment pass.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 4221) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider, and to lay that motion on the
table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.

Amendment No. 4332

Mr. KERRY. Madam President, I call up amendment No. 4332.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Kerry], for himself,
Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. Whitehouse, proposes an amendment
numbered 4332.

Mr. Kerry. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment
be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To promote the modernization of the health care system
through the adoption of electronic prescribing technology)

On page 64, line 1, insert ``, including incentives or
other supports for the adoption of electronic prescribing
technology,'' after ``technology''.

Mr. KERRY. Madam President, as the Senator from New Hampshire has
said, this is a slight variation of the amendment we just passed. It is
an idea we have been working on, on a bipartisan basis and hopefully in
the conference the two amendments can be melded into one. We didn't
have time to do it now, but I look forward to seeing it pass.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, can we go to consideration of the Kerry
amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 4332) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, that takes us to the Kennedy amendment,
which is a side-by-side to the Alexander amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.

Amendment No. 4350

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, we are going to have, in a moment, the
Alexander amendment. This is an option which I hope the Senate will
accept.
The Alexander amendment would undermine our civil rights laws. The
Alexander amendment would cut the EEOC's budget at a time when they
have reported a 9-percent increase in the charges of discrimination. We
should be giving the EEOC more money to fight the problem, not less.
In addition, the kinds of cases the Senator from Tennessee opposes
are extremely rare. The EEOC filed only 29 suits in the past 11 years
involving English-only policies, and only when speaking English was
unnecessary to do the job.
If we want to fund English literacy--and I favor that we should do
it--we should do so, but not by harming the EEOC's ability to fight
discrimination. So my amendment provides the needed support for English
language education, and funds it across the board for the cut, without
harming the EEOC's ability to fight discrimination.
Madam President, this is amendment No. 4350.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Massachusetts [Senator Kennedy] proposes
an amendment numbered 4350.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To increase funding for the Department of Education's English
Literacy-Civics Education State Grant program, with an offset)

On page 18, line 16, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
On page 18, line 17, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, as I understand the amendment of the
Senator from Massachusetts, he would increase funding for the adult
literacy programs to help Americans learning English. I think that is a
terrific idea. Since 1906, immigrants have been required to learn
English. No Child Left Behind, which the Senator helped to write,
measures their progress in English. Legislation I have offered, and
which the Senate has passed, gives people who are legally here and who
seek to become a citizen a chance to become

[[Page S2051]]

a citizen a year early if they become proficient in English.
I support Senator Kennedy's amendment. In a moment, I will offer my
amendment, which will stop the Government from suing the Salvation Army
for requiring its employees to speak English on the job. That is a
different matter. The Senator is right on this amendment, and I look
forward to voting for it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
Mr. CONRAD. Would the Chair yield for a moment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I would ask if both Senators would be
willing to take voice votes on these two amendments?
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, no, I wish to have the rollcall vote
on our amendment.
Mr. GREGG. We are agreeable to a voice vote on the Kennedy amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. I would be glad to take it if the Senator from Tennessee
wanted a voice vote. I am glad to take it. If he insists on a rollcall,
then we will necessitate a rollcall on our side. But I would be glad to
voice vote it if the Senator from Tennessee wants to do that.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I admire the amendment of the Senator
from Massachusetts and I plan to vote for it, but there is not so much
admiration for my amendment by some Senators. I wish to have a rollcall
vote on it because I think it is time it became the law, and it has
already been passed here before. So I will require a rollcall vote on
my amendment.
Mr. GREGG. I ask for the yeas and nays.
Mr. CONRAD. I ask for the yeas and nays on the Kennedy amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Obama) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 95, nays 2, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 57 Leg.]

YEAS--95

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

NAYS--2

Coburn
Inhofe

NOT VOTING--3

Byrd
McCain
Obama
The amendment (No. 4350) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4222

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on amendment No. 4222, offered by the Senator
from Tennessee, Mr. Alexander. The Senator from Tennessee is
recognized.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, in the 1990s, Arthur Schlesinger,
Jr., a prominent Democrat, a great friend of the Senator from
Massachusetts, wrote a book about the ``Disuniting of America.'' He
deplored the balkanization of our country. The Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission is balkanizing our country when it sues the
Salvation Army, as it did, for requiring its employees to speak our
common language on the job. Any employer may require any employee to
speak whatever language, but that is our national language. Only a few
things unite us--our common history, the principles in our founding
documents, and our common language. We should be valuing rather than
devaluing our common language. A vote yes is for uniting America, a
vote no on this amendment is for disuniting America, in the words of
Arthur Schlesinger.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, let's look at what the law is and what
the Alexander amendment provides. The law currently says that if there
is a need to speak English on the job, fine; employers can require
that. But employers cannot use English-only rules as an excuse when
they want to fire minorities who are performing the job correctly. In
this fact situation, those employees had performed the job correctly
for 5 years.
In addition, this amendment reduces the EEOC's ability to fight all
forms of discrimination because it cuts the entire budget. That means
race, age, religion, and disability cases will be harmed.
I hope the amendment will be defeated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. GREGG. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia, (Mr.
Byrd), is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 54, nays 44, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 58 Leg.]

YEAS--54

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Landrieu
Lincoln
Lugar
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--44

Akaka
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Martinez
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4222) was agreed to.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DOMENICI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I think it would be useful at this point
to recap the next tranche of amendments. The following amendments are
in order: Menendez, 4259; Sessions, 4231; Cornyn, 4242; Pryor, 4181;
Allard, 4246;

[[Page S2052]]

Nelson, 4212, Ensign 4240; Sanders, 4218; Conrad, undesignated; Gregg,
4305; Reed, 4154; DeMint 4328; Biden, 4164; Dole, 4208; Dodd, 4254;
Allard, 4232; Brown, 4155; Brownback, 4284; Kohl, 4197; Baucus side-by-
side, undesignated; Hatch, 4280. That is the order of the next tranche
of amendments.
Let me say for the benefit of our colleagues that it is going to take
real restraint if we are going to have any kind of reasonable ending by
any kind of reasonable time. All of those amendments are in order. We
are prepared to vote on them. To the extent colleagues could withhold
on additional amendments, that would certainly be helpful.
We are rapidly approaching the point at which we will have had the
average number of amendments on a budget resolution. It runs from 32 to
36, roughly, on a budget resolution for rollcall votes. If we get
through this tranche, I think we will be well over that number. But
colleagues have a right, we understand that. We ask people to think if
there is a possibility to withhold.
Senator Menendez is next.

Amendment No. 4259

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 2 minutes of debate equally
divided on the amendment offered by the Senator from New Jersey, Mr.
Menendez.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, my amendment creates a deficit reserve
fund to support increased border security and enforcement of
immigration laws. But instead of going down the same old tired way that
has not created results, as you will be asked to do in the amendment
from Senator Sessions, what we do is actually go after the magnet that
brings people to this country; that is, jobs and those who employ them
illegally.
So we have the ability, under this amendment, to pursue civil
penalties against bad-actor employers, to render them ineligible to
receive Federal contracts; to also go after criminal aliens in Federal,
State, and local prisons to make sure we deport them; and finally, to
implement the exit data portion of the US-VISIT entry and exit data
system so we know who is coming into this country and how to track
them. These are the ways we will begin to address some of our
immigration challenges.
Finally, we make sure we allow the National Guard to go to the border
but not until we have it declared that it will not impede or render
unsafe our troops abroad, which the National Guard are supporting.
For all those reasons, I urge my colleagues to support our amendment
and oppose the amendment from Senator Sessions.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, the amendment offered by my colleague
is an amendment that does not effectively replace the amendment I have
offered.
My amendment that will be coming up next is a broad amendment. But
this amendment contains immigration reform language that suggests once
again that enforcement cannot be effectively done without a
comprehensive amnesty approach. It fails to include any provision for
State and local law enforcement, fails to include any provision for
border fencing, fails to include any provision to advance specifically
the effective operations streamline policy that is being done now in
four border areas, that needs to be done in 20, and that has resulted
in a 60-percent reduction in illegal entry in those four areas. The
Menendez amendment does not particularly cover that area. I would ask
that it not be passed and that my amendment coming up next would be the
one more appropriately effective to carry out the will of this
Congress.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. MENENDEZ. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd,
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 45, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 59 Leg.]

YEAS--53

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Martinez
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Sununu
Tester
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--45

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Wicker

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4259) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4231

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes of debate equally
divided prior to a vote on amendment No. 4231 offered by the Senator
from Alabama, Mr. Sessions.
The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, this Senate has repeatedly voted on
issue after issue after issue that would move us toward a lawful system
of immigration. But for one reason or the other, those votes have not
been translated into action or funding. As a result, we have not made
the progress we should have made. We have created a lack of confidence
in the American people who are cynical about what we do. My amendment
is broad. It would allow a budget-neutral reserve fund for any
immigration factor, but it specifically mentions six. It does not in
any way suggest these enforcement measures should be delayed until some
amnesty proposal or comprehensive reform is passed. The programs
include Operation Streamline. Four of twenty southern border sectors
now are prosecuting illegal entries, and they have seen a 60-percent
reduction in illegality. We would like to see that in all 20, of
course. It would commit us to construction of the fence and four other
areas.
I urge support for this amendment, which would clearly move us in the
direction we have been voting in the past.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey is recognized.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I urge my colleagues to oppose this
amendment. The Senate, in a significant vote, voted to get to the heart
of the matter, the draw of jobs and those who offer them illegally.
That is where the whole issue is. The Senate acted intelligently in
that respect. It was tough and smart. But under the Sessions amendment,
we are going to deploy another 6,000 National Guard, without
conditions, to the border at a time in which we are overstretched with
the National Guard in Iraq, Afghanistan, and for challenges that States
have for emergencies in their own States. We are going to go ahead and
deputize local police in local departments. I believe that is a
mistake. We have had these before. They have not succeeded. We
succeeded in passing an amendment that is going to be tough and smart
and deal with the heart of the matter--employers who illegally hire
people. It will make sure they get sanctioned, make sure we proceed
against those who have Federal contracts doing this and makes sure we
get rid of criminal aliens in the jails--local, State and Federal. That
is the way to pursue it.
Vote against the Sessions amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No.
4231.
Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays.

[[Page S2053]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Nebraska). Are there any other
Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 61, nays 37, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 60 Leg.]

YEAS--61

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Carper
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Klobuchar
Kyl
Landrieu
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Wicker
Wyden

NAYS--37

Akaka
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Whitehouse

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4231) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4242

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Webb). There will now be 2 minutes of
debate equally divided prior to a vote on amendment No. 4242, offered
by the Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn.
The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, this amendment creates a 60-vote point of
order against any legislation that will increase income tax rates on
taxpayers, including, of course, middle-class families and others.
If this looks familiar, it is because it is. Last year, we had a vote
on this precise amendment. You will see that we had 63 Senators vote in
support of this point of order against raising income tax rates,
including our friends on the other side of the aisle whose names are
indicated on this chart.
I understand from the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee
he may offer a procedural objection to this amendment, but we are
prepared at the appropriate time to offer a motion to waive any
objection.
I ask for support on this bipartisan legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, might I ask the Parliamentarian, through
the Presiding Officer, a series of questions about this amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state his inquiries.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, No. 1, is this amendment germane to the
budget resolution?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. In the opinion of the Chair, it is not
germane.
Mr. CONRAD. No. 2, if this amendment were to be adopted, is it
corrosive to the privileged nature of a budget resolution?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. In the opinion of the Chair, the amendment
would be corrosive to the budget resolution.
Mr. CONRAD. No. 3, if this amendment came back from the conference
committee, would it be fatal to the privileged nature of the budget
resolution?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It would be fatal to the privileged nature of
the budget resolution.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, that is the problem with this amendment.
This is not in the jurisdiction----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. CONRAD. It is not in the jurisdiction of the committee.
Is all time yielded back?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time has expired.
Mr. CORNYN. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I inquire whether adding the amendment at
this point--that is, prior to any conference committee--would endanger
the privileged nature of the budget resolution as opposed to offering
it and adding it in conference? In other words, is there any difference
between doing it now and adding it later?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is corrosive, but not fatal, to add the
amendment at this point in terms of the privilege.
Mr. CORNYN. So it would not affect the privileged status of the
budget resolution to agree to my amendment at this time?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It would not fatally affect it at this time.
Mr. CORNYN. I thank the Chair.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, it would fatally affect it if it came back
from conference committee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. CONRAD. I raise a point of order that the Cornyn amendment is not
germane and therefore violates section 305 of the Budget Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, pursuant to Section 904(c) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive section 305(b)2 of
the Budget Act for consideration of this amendment to S. Con. Res. 70,
and I ask for the yeas and nays on the motion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to
be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sanders). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 58, nays 40, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 61 Leg.]

YEAS--58

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Cantwell
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kohl
Kyl
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Roberts
Salazar
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--40

Akaka
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas are 59, nays 39. Three-fifths of the
Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the
motion is rejected. The point of order is sustained and the amendment
falls.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and I move
to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we have now cast roughly 19 rollcall
votes. We have another 20 pending. For the background of Senators, in
2005, we had 37 recorded rollcall votes; in 2006, we had 36 recorded
rollcall votes; in 2007, we

[[Page S2054]]

had 32 recorded rollcall votes. So with the votes we have already had
and the votes in the train, we will have exceeded the recorded rollcall
votes of any of the last 3 years.
I say that knowing Senators have a right to continue to ask for
amendments, certainly. But to put it into some perspective, with 20
additional amendments to be voted on, that would take 7 hours, which
would put us at midnight. I know sometimes the Senate does its best
work after dark, but I hope we will think seriously about relinquishing
some of these amendments and save them for a later vehicle.

Amendment No. 4181

Mr. CONRAD. The next vote in order is the vote on the amendment by
the Senator from Arkansas, Mr. Pryor. We have indicated that on both
sides we would be willing to take that as a voice vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas is recognized.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, this is amendment No. 4181. The cosponsors
are Senators Snowe, Bingaman, and Kerry. It is a deficit-neutral
reserve fund for science parks. These are sometimes called technology
parks or business incubators. But there is no doubt these science parks
have a great track record of spurring innovation and job creation at a
time when the economy is slowing and international competition is
growing. We need to do everything we can to provide good-paying jobs
for American workers.
More than 300,000 workers in North America work in a university
science park. Every job there generates an average of 2.57 jobs in the
economy.
With that, I think we have an agreement that we will voice vote this
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 4181) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. BOXER. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4246

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, that would take us to the Allard amendment
No. 4246.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes equally divided. Who yields
time?
The Senator from Colorado is recognized.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I call for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, on the campaign trial, Senator Obama has
called for about 188 proposals of new spending. What this amendment
consists of is this. We take 111 of those new spending proposals and we
put them in this amendment. If you look at it with the 2009 5-year
budget, it will cost this country around $1.4 trillion. The argument
has been made on the campaign trail this will be paid for by taxing the
rich. That is not possible.
If you apply tax increases to those who make $250,000, or more per
year, all you come up with is about $225 billion. That is not even
close to what it takes to pay for all these new proposals. What you are
going to do is have to cram your hands into the pockets of small
businesses and the middle-class families and yank the money out of
their pockets and send it to Washington to pay for a bloated
bureaucracy.
The point of this amendment is you cannot pay for all the spending by
taxing the rich.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, this amendment is a concoction. It is a
complete fabrication. Senator Obama is not the President of the United
States. Senator Obama has not presented a budget to this body. This is
make-believe.
I think it is unfortunate the Senator has offered this amendment
styled in this way. We have not done that. I think this is beneath the
dignity of the Senate. I urge my colleagues to vote no against what is
a complete fiction.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk
will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
and the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) are necessarily absent.
If present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) would
vote ``no.''
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 0, nays 97, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 62 Leg.]

NAYS--97

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

NOT VOTING--3

Byrd
Lincoln
McCain
The amendment (No. 4246) was rejected.
Mr. DORGAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4212

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the next amendment in order is the Nelson
amendment on construction. I understand the Senator has a modification.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, the modification is not in the
body of the amendment but in the stated purpose. To make the statement
of purpose acceptable to the other side, we have stricken the word
``emergency.'' That meets with the approval of the other side, so it is
now as changed.
As we all know, the budget resolution before us includes room in the
budget in 2008 and 2009 for an additional stimulus package. The
distinguished chairman included this ``insurance policy'' against
further economic downturn, and I commend him for it. I also thank him
and Senator Baucus and all the distinguished bipartisan cosponsors for
working with me to adopt this amendment.
The amendment simply allocates more of the stimulus money for ``ready
to go'' infrastructure projects. The amendment moves $3.5 billion from
the allowances functions to the transportation function and designates
it as fiscal year 2008 discretionary funding. This existing money is
already assumed in the resolution.
I reiterate this point: The $3.5 billion is already assumed in the
resolution. The idea behind this amendment is simple. If we are going
to spend, we should invest. This amendment injects money into the
economy and creates jobs, over 40,000 jobs per billion dollars of
infrastructure expenditures, but it also makes a lasting investment in
infrastructure that will remain long after the economy recovers.
I urge adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The clerk will report the amendment.
The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Nelson], for himself, Mr.
Voinovich, Mr. Baucus, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Nelson
of Florida, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Conrad, and Ms. Stabenow,
proposes an amendment numbered 4212.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.

[[Page S2055]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To create additional jobs and make a lasting investment in
our national infrastructure by increasing Fiscal Year 2008
infrastructure stimulus funding by designating $3.5 billion in existing
stimulus funding in the resolution as discretionary funding)

On page 16, line 9, increase the amount by $3,500,000,000.
On page 16, line 10, increase the amount by $3,500,000,000.
On page 27, line 12, decrease the amount by $3,500,000,000.
On page 27, line 13, decrease the amount by $3,500,000,000.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment
be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 4212) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4240

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the next amendment is the Ensign
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, briefly, this amendment is to means test
Medicare Part D the same way we means test Medicare Part B. An
individual making over $82,000 a year, a couple making over $164,000--
seniors--would be expected to pay a little over $10 a month extra. That
is all we are doing.
This amendment saves a couple billion dollars over the next 5 years.
It is very reasonable. There is nothing else in this budget that does
anything on entitlement reform, and we all know entitlements are
heading for a train wreck in this country. We ought to at least do this
little bit for our children for deficit reduction.
I encourage all Senators to vote for this amendment. It is very
reasonable. It is modeled exactly after Medicare Part B means testing.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Ensign], for himself, Mr.
Graham, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Enzi, and Mr. DeMint, proposes an
amendment numbered 4240.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To require wealthy Medicare beneficiaries to pay a greater
share of their Medicare Part D premiums)

On page 4, line 5, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 4, line 6, decrease the amount by $300,000,000.
On page 4, line 7, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 4, line 8, decrease the amount by $450,000,000.
On page 4, line 9, decrease the amount by $550,000,000.
On page 4, line 14, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 4, line 15, decrease the amount by $300,000,000.
On page 4, line 16, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 4, line 17, decrease the amount by $450,000,000.
On page 4, line 18, decrease the amount by $550,000,000.
On page 4, line 23, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 4, line 24, decrease the amount by $300,000,000.
On page 4, line 25, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 5, line 1, decrease the amount by $450,000,000.
On page 5, line 2, decrease the amount by $550,000,000.
On page 5, line 8, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 5, line 9, decrease the amount by $425,000,000.
On page 5, line 10, decrease the amount by $800,000,000.
On page 5, line 11, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
On page 5, line 12, decrease the amount by $1,800,000,000.
On page 5, line 16, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 5, line 17, decrease the amount by $425,000,000.
On page 5, line 18, decrease the amount by $800,000,000.
On page 5, line 19, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
On page 5, line 20, decrease the amount by $1,800,000,000.
On page 20, line 16, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 20, line 17, decrease the amount by $125,000,000.
On page 20, line 20, decrease the amount by $300,000,000.
On page 20, line 21, decrease the amount by $300,000,000.
On page 20, line 24, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 20, line 25, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 21, line 3, decrease the amount by $450,000,000.
On page 21, line 4, decrease the amount by $450,000,000.
On page 21, line 7, decrease the amount by $550,000,000.
On page 21, line 8, decrease the amount by $550,000,000.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the problem with this amendment is exactly
what the sponsor said: It is exactly like Part B. Part B, as we know,
is a premium that is paid with respect to doctors' examinations and
Medicare reimbursement. Part D is the drug benefit. Part D premiums
vary significantly nationwide according to geography and according to
the plans offered. It is nothing like Part B.
To say we should pattern this off Part B is a statement not fully
appreciative of the sophistication of the changes in the Part D. That
is one reason not to support this amendment.
Second, any change in Part D is required to be in any Medicare bill
if it comes up. We may want to make other Medicare changes. We don't
want to be restricted to means testing.
Third, this should be considered broad health care reform, at least
Medicare reform, and not be isolated in this case.
I strongly urge this amendment not be adopted.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 4240.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Carper). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 42, nays 56, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 63 Leg.]

YEAS--42

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Carper
Chambliss
Coburn
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
McCaskill
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NAYS--56

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Casey
Clinton
Cochran
Conrad
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Hutchison
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Martinez
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4240) was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.

Amendment No. 4218

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4218.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. Sanders], for himself, Mrs.
Clinton, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Harkin, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Schumer,
and Mr. Brown, proposes an amendment numbered 4218.

The amendment is as follows:

[[Page S2056]]

(Purpose: To put children ahead of millionaires and billionaires by
restoring the pre-2001 top income tax rate for people earning over $1
million, and use this revenue to invest in LIHEAP; IDEA; Head Start;
Child Care; nutrition; school construction and deficit reduction)

On page 3, line 11, increase the amount by $10,800,000,000.
On page 3, line 12, increase the amount by $16,600,000,000.
On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $5,100,000,000.
On page 3, line 20, increase the amount by $10,800,000,000.
On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $16,600,000,000.
On page 3, line 22, increase the amount by $5,100,000,000.
On page 4, line 5, increase the amount by $9,800,000,000.
On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $15,600,000,000.
On page 4, line 7, increase the amount by $4,100,000,000.
On page 4, line 14, increase the amount by $4,196,000,000.
On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $11,966,000,000.
On page 4, line 16, increase the amount by $9,443,000,000.
On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $3,187,000,000.
On page 4, line 18, increase the amount by $708,000,000.
On page 4, line 23, decrease the amount by $6,604,000,000.
On page 4, line 24, decrease the amount by $4,634,000,000.
On page 4, line 25, increase the amount by $4,343,000,000.
On page 5, line 1, increase the amount by $3,187,000,000.
On page 5, line 2, increase the amount by $708,000,000.
On page 5, line 8, decrease the amount by $6,604,000,000.
On page 5, line 9, decrease the amount by $11,238,000,000.
On page 5, line 10, decrease the amount by $6,895,000,000.
On page 5, line 11, decrease the amount by $3,708,000,000.
On page 5, line 12, decrease the amount by $3,000,000,000.
On page 5, line 16, decrease the amount by $6,604,000,000.
On page 5, line 17, decrease the amount by $11,238,000,000.
On page 5, line 18, decrease the amount by $6,895,000,000.
On page 5, line 19, decrease the amount by $3,708,000,000.
On page 5, line 20, decrease the amount by $3,000,000,000.
On page 18, line 16, increase the amount by $6,200,000,000.
On page 18, line 17, increase the amount by $1,244,000,000.
On page 18, line 20, increase the amount by $9,800,000,000.
On page 18, line 21, increase the amount by $6,766,000,000.
On page 18, line 24, increase the amount by $2,000,000,000.
On page 18, line 25, increase the amount by $6,459,000,000.
On page 19, line 4, increase the amount by $2,843,000,000.
On page 19, line 8, increase the amount by $688,000,000.
On page 21, line 16, increase the amount by $3,600,000,000.
On page 21, line 17, increase the amount by $2,952,000,000.
On page 21, line 20, increase the amount by $5,800,000,000.
On page 21, line 21, increase the amount by $5,200,000,000.
On page 21, line 24, increase the amount by $2,100,000,000.
On page 21, line 25, increase the amount by $2,984,000,000.
On page 22, line 4, increase the amount by $344,000,000.
On page 22, line 8, increase the amount by $20,000,000.
On page 32, line 10, increase the amount by $8,600,000,000.
On page 32, line 11, increase the amount by $2,996,000,000.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I thank Senators Durbin, Kennedy,
Clinton, Harkin, Schumer, Mikulski, Brown, Casey, and Menendez for
cosponsoring this amendment. I also thank dozens of national
organizations representing tens of millions of Americans for supporting
it, including the AFL-CIO, the SCIU, the Children's Defense Fund, the
YWCA, and many other organizations.
This amendment cannot be simpler. The wealthiest people in the
country have not had it so good since the 1920s. Their incomes are
soaring, while at the same time the middle class is shrinking, and we
have by far the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country.
The time is now to begin changing our national priorities and moving
this country in a different direction.
This amendment restores the top income tax bracket for households
earning more than $1 million a year, it raises $32.5 billion over 3
years, and invests that in our kids, including $10 billion for special
education, because the time is long overdue that we kept our word
regarding special education.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. Who yields
time? The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, the problem is we are in the game here,
spending the same dollar three or four times, it appears. Under the
Sanders amendment, it is paid for by raising taxes another $32.5
billion, ostensibly from the rich; that is to say, by raising taxes on
people who make over $1 million a year. Here is the problem with that.
The budget on the floor already assumes the expiration of the current
tax rates; that is to say, the rates on the highest level go from 35 to
39.6, and that money is spent. If you took all the top-rate income, you
would come up with $25 billion a year, not even enough to meet what is
here, and that money has already been spent.
The reality is somewhere or other, somehow, more taxes would have to
be raised. I don't think the American people want to do that,
particularly in the current environment.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk will call the
roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 55, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 64 Leg.]

YEAS--43

Akaka
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cardin
Casey
Clinton
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Webb
Whitehouse

NAYS--55

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Cantwell
Carper
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Salazar
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4218) was rejected.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I want to, one more time, implore our
colleagues--we have some colleagues who have multiple amendments
pending. By the time we end this tranche, we will have had nearly 40
votes. That is significantly more than any of the last 3 years we have
had a budget resolution in terms of recorded rollcall votes. But we
have some colleagues--I do not know whether this is their staff
speaking for them or whether Members are actually so wedded to those
amendments. I would ask colleagues to ask their staffs how many
amendments they have on these lists. We have a list here of 50 more
amendments. That really is not reasonable. That is not reasonable by
any historic standard.
The next amendment in order is the amendment by the Senator from
Rhode Island.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I believe the next amendment was my
amendment, but we have agreed to pass over it.
Mr. CONRAD. Yes, that is correct. Senator Gregg's amendment is next
in line, but we have agreed to drop that down. Some work is being done
on that

[[Page S2057]]

amendment, which makes the next amendment in order the amendment of the
Senator from Rhode Island.

Amendment No. 4154

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island is recognized.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, my amendment would increase LIHEAP funding
by an additional $2.6 billion to bring it up to the fully authorized
amount.
I call up amendment No. 4154.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Reed], for himself, Ms.
Collins, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Bond, Mr. Brown, Mrs.
Clinton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, Ms.
Mikulski, Mr. Obama, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Sununu, and Mr.
Whitehouse, proposes an amendment numbered 4154.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To reduce the energy burden of low-income families, seniors,
and individuals with disabilities by increasing funding for the Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) by $2.6 billion in FY
2009)

On page 19, line 16, increase the amount by $2,600,000,000.
On page 19, line 17, increase the amount by $1,820,000,000.
On page 19, line 21, increase the amount by $728,000,000.
On page 19, line 25, increase the amount by $52,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $2,600,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $1,820,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $728,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $52,000,000.

Mr. REED. Mr. President, this amendment would raise the LIHEAP
spending to the authorized total of $5.1 billion. I wish to recognize
the work of Senator Specter and Senator Harkin, who earlier today
passed an amendment that increased LIHEAP funding. I have worked very
closely with my colleagues, especially Senator Collins.
Let me point out what is obvious to everyone today: Oil reached $111
a barrel. That translates very quickly into excruciatingly high prices
for seniors or low-income Americans. LIHEAP is a program that can help
them. I would urge passage.
I see my colleague, Senator Collins, on the other side.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I, too, urge adoption of this amendment.
This has been a very hard winter in the Northeast, with extreme cold
and very high prices. We can make a big difference by increasing this
account to bring it to the authorized level. In my State of Maine, the
last allocation was used up in a matter of 4 days.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition to the
amendment?

Amendment No. 4154, as modified

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify the
amendment in order to reflect the previous amendment passed by Senators
Harkin and Specter. It has been agreed to by both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. REED. I send a modification to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

On page 21, line 16, increase the amount by $1,600,000,000.
On page 21, line 17, increase the amount by $1,120,000,000.
On page 21, line 21, increase the amount by $448,000,000.
On page 21, line 25, increase the amount by $32,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $1,600,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $1,120,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $448,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $32,000,000.

Mr. GREGG. I urge adoption of the amendment and ask unanimous consent
that it be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 4154), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I understand we are going to Senator DeMint
next.

Amendment No. 4328

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4328 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. DeMINT] proposes an
amendment numbered 4328.

Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading
of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide for a deficit-neutral reserve fund for Social
Security reform)

At the end of title III, add the following:

SEC. __. RESERVE FUND FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM.

If the Senate Committee on Finance reports a bill or joint
resolution, or an amendment is offered thereto, or a
conference report is submitted thereon, that provides changes
to the Federal Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance
Benefits Program established under title II of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) by--
(1) requiring that the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust
Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund are to
be used only to finance expenditures to provide retirement
income of future beneficiaries of such program;
(2) ensuring that there is no change to current law
scheduled benefits for individuals born before January 1,
1952;
(3) providing participants with the benefits of savings and
investment while permitting the pre-funding of at least some
portion of future benefits; and
(4) ensuring that the funds made available to finance such
legislation do not exceed the amounts of the Chief Actuary of
the Social Security Administration's intermediate actuarial
estimates of the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund and
the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, as published in
the most recent report of the Board of Trustees of such Trust
Funds;

the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Budget may revise
the allocations, aggregates, and other levels in this
resolution by the amounts provided by such legislation,
provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit
over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2008
through 2013 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2008
through 2018.

Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, every Senator here today knows we need to
address the problem with Social Security. Within the next 8 or 10
years, the current surplus we have for Social Security will run out and
we will be in the red as far as cashflow goes. We will begin to
transfer money from the general fund to pay for Social Security.
Over the last two decades, we have taken over $2 trillion of Social
Security surplus and spent it on other things. In the next 5 years
alone, counting interest, we will take another trillion of this surplus
and spend it elsewhere. This amendment simply says we should spend this
Social Security surplus that is in front of us only on Social Security.
The last time this bill was on the floor, it got 45 votes. Several of
you who voted against it said you thought it set up private accounts,
so you voted against it. There is nothing in this amendment about
setting up private accounts or how we save it. It simply says that we
spend Social Security on Social Security and save it for the future.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Florida.) The Senator from
Montana.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this amendment is privatization of Social
Security. This body rejected an amendment of this nature in 2006. We
also voted last year and rejected it. The country rejected the
privatization in 2005.
This will increase insolvency of the Social Security trust fund, not
help it. Despite what the Senator said, let me quote what it says:

Providing participants with the benefits of savings and
investment while permitting the prefunding . . .

Essentially, this, as stated in the language, sets up private
accounts for the benefits of investments and savings. We all know that
the volatility of the stock market is not the best thing for seniors.
This is privatization of Social Security. We have voted on this many
times in the past. I urge the same vote today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired. The question is on
agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. CONRAD. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?

[[Page S2058]]

There appears to be a sufficient second.
The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 41, nays 57, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 65 Leg.]

YEAS--41

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wicker

NAYS--57

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Byrd
McCain

The amendment (No. 4328) was rejected.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. GREGG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator
from Kansas be recognized to change a vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.

Change of Vote

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I wish to be recorded ``yea'' on DeMint
amendment No. 4328. It was my intent to vote yea. I did vote nay. That
was a mistake. This would not change the vote, as it was 40 to 58.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the next amendment is the amendment by
Senator Biden, No. 4164.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.

Amendment No. 4164

Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I have been instructed by the Budget
Committee that I have to ask for a modification of the amendment. The
pagination on the amendment was off. First, I call up amendment No.
4164.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Delaware [Mr. Biden], for himself, Mrs.
Boxer, Mr. Brown, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Casey, Mrs. Clinton, Mr.
Kohl, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr.
Reed, and Mr. Feingold, proposes an amendment numbered 4164.

Mr. BIDEN. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To increase 2009 funding for the COPS program to $1.15
billion, with an offset)

On page 24, line 16, increase the amount by $551,000,000.
On page 24, line 17, increase the amount by $66,000.000.
On page 24, line 21, increase the amount by $154,000,000.
On page 25, line 25, increase the amount by $138,000,000.
On page 26, line 4, increase the amount by $110,000.000.
On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $83,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $551,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $66,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $154,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $138,000,000.
On page 28, line 4, decrease the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $83,000,000.

Amendment No. 4164, As Modified

Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I send a modification to the desk. As I
explained to my colleagues, the pagination in the amendment was
incorrect.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so
modified.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

On page 24, line 16, increase the amount by $551,000,000.
On page 24, line 17, increase the amount by $66,000,000.
On page 24, line 21, increase the amount by $154,000,000.
On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $138,000,000.
On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $83,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $551,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $66,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $154,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $138,000,000.
On page 28, line 4, decrease the amount by $110,000,000.
On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $83,000,000.

Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment. My amendment will support full funding for the COPS Program.
It is fully offset by an across-the-board cut in nondefense
discretionary spending. The chairman asked whether I would be willing
to have a voice vote. At this hour of the night, I would be willing to
do about anything he asked me to do, including a voice vote.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I think there is no time in opposition.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate on the
amendment, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 4164, as
modified.
The amendment (No. 4164), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion on
the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4208

Mr. CONRAD. The next amendment is the amendment by Senator Dole, No.
4208.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4208 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:

The Senator from North Carolina [Mrs. Dole], for herself,
Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Vitter, proposes an amendment numbered
4208.

Mrs. DOLE. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To increase amounts budgeted for States and local governments
for expenses related to immigration enforcement training and support
under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, with an
offset)

On page 24, line 16, increase the amount by $75,000,000.
On page 24, line 17, increase the amount by $60,000,000.
On page 24, line 21, increase the amount by $7,500,000.
On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $7,500,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $75,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $60,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $7,500,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $7,500,000.
Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, my amendment would direct $75 million for
ICE to expand the 287(g) program so that more local law enforcement
agencies have the resources to identify and help process criminal
illegal aliens. To

[[Page S2059]]

address the problems presented by individuals who are not only here
illegally but who have self-identified themselves because of their
criminal behavior, we must provide the funding for ICE to make the
necessary resources available to local law enforcement officials who
are on the front lines. Greater funding for ICE, specifically the
287(g) program, is sorely needed. I urge my colleagues to support this
important amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, there is no opposition. We ask colleagues
to accept the amendment on a voice vote, if the Senator would agree.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to amendment No. 4208.
The amendment (No. 4208) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4254

Mr. CONRAD. Next in order is an amendment by Senator Dodd, No. 4254.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I call up the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Dodd], for himself, Ms.
Collins, and Mr. Kennedy, proposes an amendment numbered
4254.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To increase funding for the National Institutes of Health,
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Health Resources
and Services Administration for autism research, education, and early
detection with an offset)

On page 19, line 16, increase the amount by $197,000,000.
On page 19, line 17, increase the amount by $73,000,000.
On page 19, line 21, increase the amount by $93,000,000.
On page 19, line 25, increase the amount by $22,000,000.
On page 20, line 4, increase the amount by $4,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $197,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $73,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $93,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $22,000,000.
On page 28, line 4, decrease the amount by $4,000,000.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself,
Senator Collins of Maine, and Senator Kennedy, and I ask unanimous
consent that Senators Klobuchar, Obama, Menendez, Lieberman, Durbin,
and Clinton be added as cosponsors.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, we are aware of the growing problem of
autism. It used to be, not that long ago, that 1 child in 166 was
afflicted with autism. Those numbers have now dropped to 1 in 150. It
is the fastest growing neurological disability in the United States and
becoming more and more serious. It is highly complex. Senator Santorum
and I offered the combating autism legislation a year or so ago, which
passed overwhelmingly. This legislation increases the funding by $197
million. It is completely offset by dealing with the function 920.
Therefore, it is paid for completely and revenue neutral. We urge its
adoption.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, there has been an alarming increase in
the diagnosis of autism in this country. Back in the 1980s, it was 1 in
2,500 children. As the Senator from Connecticut has indicated, the
current statistics are 1 in 150. That means that some 1.5 million
children and their families are coping with this disease. This is an
area where more research can make a tremendous difference. I urge
adoption of the Dodd-Collins amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, it is the fastest growing developmental
disability in the United States.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to amendment No. 4254.
The amendment (No. 4254) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4232

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, that takes us to Allard amendment No.
4232.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4232 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. DeMint], for Mr.
Allard, proposes an amendment numbered 4232.

Mr. DeMINT. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To pay down the Federal debt and eliminate government waste
by reducing spending 5 percent on programs rated (as mandated under the
Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 103-62)) ineffective
by Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment Rating Tool)

On page 4, line 5, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 4, line 14, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 4, line 15, decrease the amount by $225,000,000.
On page 4, line 16, decrease the amount by $150,000,000.
On page 4, line 23, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 4, line 24, decrease the amount by $225,000,000.
On page 4, line 25, decrease the amount by $150,000,000.
On page 5, line 8, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 5, line 9, decrease the amount by $600,000,000.
On page 5, line 10, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 5, line 11, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 5, line 12, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 5, line 16, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 5, line 17, decrease the amount by $600,000,000.
On page 5, line 18, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 5, line 19, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 5, line 20, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $225,000,000.
On page 27, line 25, decrease the amount by $150,000,000.
On page 32, line 10, decrease the amount by $750,000,000.
On page 32, line 11, decrease the amount by $375,000,000.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I would ask Senator Allard to take a
minute. I have called the amendment up. If the Senator will explain
what it is.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado is recognized.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, my amendment will cut the Federal deficit
and eliminated Government waste by reducing spending 5 percent on
programs rated ``ineffective'' by the OMB and use the savings to pay
down the Federal debt.
Five percent is the expected increase under this budget. We are not
cutting any programs or zeroing anything out, just saying that an
``ineffective'' rating probably means they do not deserve an increase.
The PART program was initiated by Congress, a result of the
Government Performance and Results Act, Public Law No. 103-62. It is
time we followed through on our efforts to increase Government
accountability and efficiency. I urge a ``yes'' vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I think there is a kernel of a good idea
here. Unfortunately, I think the PART program has been defective in its
analysis. It says, for example, the Community Development Block Grant
program is defective because it lacks a clear purpose. Ask your mayors
and your Governors about that. It says Amtrak's purpose is ambiguous.
Ask the millions of people who go to work every day on Amtrak. It says
the Department of Homeland Security security grants have an ineffective
risk assessment formula and a lack of consistent performance. Ask that
of the first responders

[[Page S2060]]

around the country who have the responsibility of protecting the
homeland.
This would cut programs $750 million--programs that are vital to the
security of the country, to the economic growth of the country. I urge
my colleagues to reject this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, do I have any time left?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 4232.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Nebraska (Mr. Hagel) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 29, nays 68, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 66 Leg.]

YEAS--29

Allard
Barrasso
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Chambliss
Coburn
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Gregg
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Martinez
McConnell
Sessions
Shelby
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Wicker

NAYS--68

Akaka
Alexander
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Grassley
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Tester
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--3

Byrd
Hagel
McCain
The amendment (No. 4232) was rejected.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have had a conversation with the
distinguished managers of the bill, and we are not there yet, but we
are at a point where maybe in the next 20 or 30 minutes we can have a
final list of amendments. Whatever that number is, we will lock those
in and spend the rest of the time working through those. So I hope we
can do that. No one has been cut off from offering any amendments, but
I hope people will work with the staffs. The staffs of Senator Gregg
and Senator Conrad have worked very hard all this week, and I hope
people will work with them and be considerate of not only them but
these people up here who make the Senate work. They have been here
since we started voting. So we hope we can do that. We will report back
in a half hour or so.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the next amendment in order is amendment
No. 4155 by Senator Brown from Ohio.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized.

Amendment No. 4155

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4155 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Ohio [Mr. Brown], for himself and Ms.
Stabenow, proposes an amendment numbered 4155.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To improve the training of manufacturing workers)

On page 51, line 9, insert after the comma, the following:
``by increasing efforts to train and retrain manufacturing
workers,''.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, this amendment is cosponsored by Senators
Snowe, Stabenow, Feingold, and Clinton.
To increase employment in manufacturing, Congress needs to address
training and retraining of manufacturing workers. This amendment does
that.
More than 3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2000,
more than 200,000 in my State of Ohio alone.
Susan Helper, a business professor at Case Western Reserve University
in Cleveland, wrote in the Washington Post recently about ``paving the
high road'' for American manufacturing. The high road manufacturing
agenda includes significant Federal investment in Federal tax credits
for research in the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and in worker
training and retraining programs, which is what this amendment does.
Manufacturing training is a tool to help businesses succeed, especially
small manufacturers.
I urge my colleagues to support the Brown-Snowe-Stabenow-Feingold-
Clinton amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
Mr. GREGG. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 4155) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, next in order is an amendment by Senator
Brownback of Kansas.

Amendment No. 4284

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4284 and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Brownback] proposes an
amendment numbered 4284.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide funds for a Commission on Budgetary Accountability
and Review of Federal Agencies)

On page 25, line 16, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
On page 25, line 17, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
On page 25, line 20, increase the amount by $6,000,000.
On page 25, line 21, increase the amount by $6,000,000.
On page 25, line 24, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 25, line 25, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 26, line 3, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 26, line 4, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 26, line 7, increase the amount by $4,000,000.
On page 26, line 8, increase the amount by $4,000,000.
On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $3,000,000.
On page 27, line 17, decrease the amount by $3,000,000.
On page 27, line 20, decrease the amount by $6,000,000.
On page 27, line 21, decrease the amount by $6,000,000.
On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 27. line 25. decrease the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 28, line 3, decrease the amount by $8,000,000.
On page 28, line 4, decrease the amount by $8.000.000.
On page 28, line 7, decrease the amount by $4,000,000.
On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $4,000,000.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized.
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, this is a very direct and well-known
process that I wish to take to the rest of Government and ask my
colleagues to consider it.

[[Page S2061]]

I think we are all familiar with the Base Realignment and Closure
Commission. It is a process by which we try to correct where our
military bases are--where we have closed some, where we have put more
resources in other places. I might note to my colleagues that it has
saved us $65 billion since BRAC has been in place. It has worked. It is
one of the things that has worked.
I wish to take that BRAC process to the rest of the Government
programs and have a commission identified, just as the BRAC Commission,
to review all of the Federal programs and recommend for elimination
those that are duplicative or wasteful or have not accomplished their
purposes and then give us one vote in a whole package--35 programs, 200
programs--eliminate them or keep them, deal or no deal, and put that on
the line.
So I am asking for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to
be a sufficient second.
Who yields time?
The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I would just ask the Senator from Kansas
if he would be willing to accept a voice vote.
Mr. BROWNBACK. I would like a recorded vote. We have done this by
voice, and I think it is time to really seriously consider it and see
where Members are on this issue.
I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays are ordered.
Mr. CONRAD. I will not oppose the amendment of the Senator from
Kansas.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to amendment No. 4284.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
is necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Hagel).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 48, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 67 Leg.]

YEAS--49

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bayh
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Dorgan
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johnson
Klobuchar
Kyl
Landrieu
Leahy
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Mikulski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Wicker

NAYS--48

Akaka
Baucus
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Domenici
Durbin
Feinstein
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Menendez
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Stevens
Tester
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--3

Byrd
Hagel
McCain
The amendment (No. 4284) was agreed to.
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin is recognized.

Amendment No. 4197

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up my
amendment No. 4197.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Kohl], for himself, Mr.
Domenici, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs.
Clinton, Mr. Coleman, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Levin, Mr. Casey, and
Ms. Klobuchar, proposes an amendment numbered 4197.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund for a 3-year
extension of the pilot program for national and State background checks
on direct patient access employees of long-term care facilities or
providers)

At the end of title III, add the following:

SEC. ___. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR 3-YEAR EXTENSION
OF PILOT PROGRAM FOR NATIONAL AND STATE
BACKGROUND CHECKS ON DIRECT PATIENT ACCESS
EMPLOYEES OF LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES OR
PROVIDERS.

If the Senate Committee on Finance reports a bill or joint
resolution or an amendment is offered thereto or a conference
report is submitted thereon, that provides for a 3-year
extension of the pilot program for national and State
background checks on direct patient access employees of long-
term care facilities or providers under section 307 of the
Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization
Act of 2003 (42 U.S.C. 1395aa note) and removes the limit on
the number of participating States under such pilot program,
the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Budget may revise
the aggregates, allocations, and other appropriate levels in
this resolution by the amounts provided in such legislation
for those purposes up to $160,000,000, provided that such
legislation would not increase the deficit over either the
period of the total of fiscal years 2008 through 2013 or the
period of the total of fiscal years 2008 through 2018.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator
Klobuchar be added as a cosponsor of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I speak today in support of my amendment,
which would allow for the creation of a comprehensive nationwide system
of background checks for long-term care workers. As it now stands,
thousands of individuals with a history of abuse or a criminal record
are hired every year to work closely with defenseless seniors within
our Nation's nursing homes and other long-term care facilities. These
individuals evade detection throughout the hiring process, securing
jobs that allow them to assault, abuse, and steal from one of our most
vulnerable populations.
I ask that my colleagues support the amendment I offer today with
Senators Domenici, Lincoln, Whitehouse, Bingaman, Clinton, Coleman,
Stabenow, Levin, Casey, and Klobuchar, which will allow us to expand
the outstanding results of the pilot program nationwide. The amendment
proposes that the Senate reserve $160 million over 3 years in a
deficit-neutral reserve fund to pay for such an expansion. I hope we
can get this amendment passed. I ask for its support.
Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The clerk will call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd)
and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Hagel).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 89, nays 7, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 68 Leg.]

YEAS--89

Akaka
Alexander
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden

[[Page S2062]]

NAYS--7

Allard
Bunning
Coburn
DeMint
Dole
Inhofe
Sessions

NOT VOTING--4

Byrd
Hagel
McCain
Murray
The amendment (No. 4197) was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we now can go to Senator Inhofe who has an
amendment.

Amendment No. 4239

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4239 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. Inhofe] proposes an
amendment numbered 4239.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading
of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on funding for national
defense in future fiscal years)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. SENSE OF SENATE ON FUNDING FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE IN
FUTURE FISCAL YEARS.

(a) Finding.--The Senate finds that the budget of the
President for fiscal year 2009 requests funds for national
defense, exclusive of wartime costs and supplemental
appropriations, that constitute an amount equal to
approximately 3.3 percent of the current gross domestic
product of the United States.
(b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) the amount of funds for national defense, exclusive of
wartime costs and supplemental appropriations, for fiscal
year 2010 should be not less than an amount equal to 3.7
percent of the then-current gross domestic product of the
United States;
(2) it should be the policy of the United States to fund
national defense, exclusive of such costs and appropriations,
for fiscal year 2011 in an amount equal to not less than 4
percent of the then-current gross domestic product of the
United States; and
(3) the amount of funding for national defense, exclusive
of such costs and appropriations, for each fiscal year after
fiscal year 2011 should be the amount of funds for national
defense for the preceding fiscal year as adjusted pursuant to
the most appropriate cost adjustment index.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, it is my intention to withdraw this
amendment, but I wish to use this moment to serve notice that this is
something that not just myself but several of us are concerned about,
particularly those of us on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
We have gone through a period of time, up until the early nineties,
when our defense spending was somewhere around--in fact, for the entire
100 years in the 20th century, it averaged 5.7 percent of GDP. At the
end of the nineties, it got down to just under 3 percent. If we are to
anticipate the needs we will have in the future, it is going to be
necessary to have some kind of a floor.
What this amendment says is we will have to start the process by
putting 4 percent of the GDP into the defense system. It is one that
would accomplish three things.
First, it would allow us to build the next generation of weapons and
equipment. As we know, we are doing one weapon right now that will take
the next 30 years.
Second, it will add predictability to the industrial base.
And third, it sends a clear message to our military, allies, and
enemies that we are committed to the security of our Nation.
It shocks a lot of people when they find out we have platform weapons
systems that are not as good as our potential adversaries. This would
correct that problem.

Amendment No. 4239 Withdrawn

Mr. President, I ask that this amendment be withdrawn.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn.
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I believe the Senator from North Dakota,
the chairman of the committee, is going to make a request as to
schedule. But I will simply say we are trying to develop a final finite
list, and anybody on our side who has an amendment who has not
contacted us--I believe everybody has; I believe we know what all the
amendments are that people want--it is very important they tell us
about them because we are developing a final finite list. And we will
even accept amendments from your side if you want to tell us about
them. That is OK too.

As a practical matter, I would encourage people on the Republican
side to tell us what they want so we can pull up this final finite
list.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, if everyone cooperates in these final
hours, I think we could reach conclusion. It will be late, but we could
reach conclusion at a reasonable time tonight--at least before
midnight. But it really is going to require everybody's cooperation.
If you have an amendment that you could reserve until a later
vehicle, please do. We have already had nearly 30 rollcall votes. That
is very close to what the average has been in the last 3 years in terms
of recorded votes. We still have more rollcall votes that are going to
have to be done.
We think at this point it would be wise to take a half-hour break to
give people a chance to match the paperwork that is out there and try
to conclude on a finite list.
Mr. DORGAN. Would the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. CONRAD. I am happy to yield.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I would ask the chair and the ranking
member, I know there are a good number of amendments on both sides that
are bipartisan and noncontroversial, and my hope would be that in this
break and in future breaks packages of amendments could be put together
that are noncontroversial and bipartisan and move them as a block
because I think there are a good many of them, and that would be very
helpful.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the Senator has made a good suggestion and
one that Senator Gregg and I have just discussed that we will do during
this break, and that is to try to put together, No. 1, a finite list of
amendments that still require a vote; and, No. 2, a managers' amendment
of bipartisan, noncontroversial amendments that could be agreed to as a
package.
Mr. GREGG. I stress, Mr. President, when we come out of this break,
we hope to have a finite list and hope to lock it in, so we need to
hear from folks. We are, as the Senator from--the junior or senior
Senator, I never know--from North Dakota suggested, Senator Dorgan, we
will be working on a group of amendments that everyone can agree to and
doing those as just a package.

____________________